Guest guest Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 Vinayji,1)You said QuoteHow physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ?UnquoteI thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.2)You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say.3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4)Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.5)Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement.6)You do not know the meaning of the phrase "good riddance". When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said "good riddance"7)You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?-SKB--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote:vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Date: Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM TO ALL : Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word "ayanamsha". 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical means Saurpakshiya Saayana. The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof.">>>> --- Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>>" You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini."<<<< << Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the "physical planet" ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ? His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic." Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. His next point is >>>>"your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. "<<<< He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like "dirty tactics" , "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic" , "bullshit" , 'unprovable tall claims", "left ignominiously" which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says "in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims." These "strong words" were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you." Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you." Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as "scientific" spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. -VJ ============ ==== ============ ==== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > 2) > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > 6) > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > -SKB > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > You say : "I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors." > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : "Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum." AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > You say : "I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and your > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > -VJ > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Dear Vinay jee, > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > regards/Bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 Vinayji, 1) You said Quote How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? Unquote I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. 2) You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say. 3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4) Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. 5) Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. 6) You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance " 7) You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed? -SKB --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote: vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM TO ALL : Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical means Saurpakshiya Saayana. The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> --- Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. -VJ ============ ==== ============ ==== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > 2) > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > 6) > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > -SKB > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and your > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > -VJ > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Dear Vinay jee, > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > regards/Bhaskar. > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. " > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > " > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > errors). > > > > and its accurate till prana > > dashas. > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > normally. > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > another time > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > -VJ > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ? > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ? > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present > > set up of mind. > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you. > > I have yet to see > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place, > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > Can Marg produce better references then these to claim that the West > > knew about astrology much before the Indians ? > > > > > > But before that, I suppose we would be asked wheres the signboard on > > the Adams bridge, written that it was the same bridge, and may also > > probably ask us additionally whether the Ramayana is authentic. And we > > are good people so we will never ask about the authenticity of the > > Bible, because I do believe in Jesus and love him probably more than > > Christians do. > > > > > > Or they may ask us how can You prove that the underwater city > > discovered in Dwarka is Krishnas city. And we may also be asked to prove > > that the Bhagwat was written by the ancients and not the modern day > > authors. > > > > > > Which is why I say that do not fall in trap of trying to impress the > > fairer sex, and neither try to show the greatness of your country or the > > origins of something which you have not studied about, properly. learn a > > subject properly before you try to attract somebody's attention and put > > your theories upon. If You have some light > > > then the brightness would be seen around you. No need to > > > prove it or show case it. Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > for you. I have yet to see your proficiency either in Astrology, > > Astronomy, or Mathematics. You have stirred the Hornests nest with no > > contribution, and no strong argument to take the None believers, which I > > have to settle for the dignity of my country, culture and love for > > astrology , single handedly. > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@ > > ....> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay, > > > > > > > > I would like you to predict here too on the groups so that all could > > witness your predictive abilities, which you mentioned in the below > > mail. But Computational and Mathematical skills are not required o be > > showcased, as I dont think anybody would be interested in that,this > > being an astrology Forum and not a maths one. > > > > > > > > By the way I am fighting your battle which you began here by trying > > to impress on Marg the origin of Indian vedic astrology which you could > > not. I have also fought for you in the past without any thanksgivings. > > One should go and try proving something which can be proved, or else not > > claim about anything. Otherwise one makes a fool of himself. And others > > have to defend him with their time and efforts. > > > > > > > > Nothing is going to be achieved by proving the origin to anybody. > > This is actually a waste of time. Instead of taking up easy and > > unverifiable issues , why not pick up some astrological principles and > > use them effectively here to show how you can predict so wonderfully as > > you have claimed in this mail. In this way the thread can become > > interesting and we all can learn from you. > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > A reader in Department of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University > > tested me before many scholars. Then the Head of Department of Grammar > > in the same university tested me (he asked me a simpler question : 786 > > raised to the power 8, which I answered within seconds without using > > paper or any tool. Then he replied that I must have used some tricks !!! > > It is impossible to satisfy such sceptics. If Sunil ji wants that I > > should stop my research work and become a madaari demonstrating my > > computational ability, he will be discouraged. > > > > > I am not Ramanujam, and I acquired some mathematical talents which > > I really needed. I learnt logarithmic and antilog tables and a lot more > > by rote in early boyhood. > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a@> > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 3:32:19 AM > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > You said that you can compute faster than a computer. In this age > > people want proof and do not want to believe in assertions because > > anybody can get away with assertions. So may I request you to get your > > computing power publicly demonstrated and reliably reported so that > > people will not doubt what you say. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 3/31/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 11:21 AM > > > > > > > > > > As I had suspected, Marg entirely missed the points raised by me, > > and is deliberately harping on physical proofs of what I say are > > metaphysical entities. Bhaskar ji can give her planetary positions > > without using any physical tools, and I can demonstrate that I can > > compute faster than a computer. Margie is not interested in knowing the > > marvels of Vedic astrology, and is more keen on proving the superiority > > of non-Indian astrology. Earlier too, I had tried to attract her > > attention towards secret methods of Vedic mundane astrology, but to no > > avail. Even if someone finds physical evidences of Indian or non-Indian > > astrology in 20000000 BC, it will help nobody. Veda and Vedic Astrology > > are parts of Eternal Religion (Sanatana Dharma), and religion is > > personal experience which can be taught and learnt only through a > > guru-shishya tradition. Sterile discussion will lead us nowhere. > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:36:16 PM > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > I can give you the planetary positions of any date in future > > sitting in > > > > > a closed room without going to a observatory or physical > > observation, or > > > > > access to any Table, Ephemeris, Computer or Almanac. That must be > > enough > > > > > proof of the Ancient Indian knowledge of observing the heavens, > > who had > > > > > after observing for centuries, and through their intellect , > > developed > > > > > so much analytical powers that even modern day astrologers like me > > can > > > > > make use of their findings and talk. What more further proof is > > > > > required ? I can also give geographical proof to a worthy and > > actual > > > > > serious enquirist who is unbiased. But otherwise would not like to > > > > > fritter this knowledge for the sake of some people who may wish to > > > > > collect this, and write a book in their name, and sell it for > > money . > > > > > But if I show someone a place and tell him that this existed in > > 2,50000 > > > > > BC, then how many will be able to test this , how many will have > > the > > > > > capacity and apparatus to test this. Or are they going to take the > > > > > bricks for Carbon testing ? For being accessible to such knowledge > > one > > > > > has to be a worthy and unsuspecting invitee who must not have any > > qualms > > > > > of prejudices of " My country " or " Your country " etc. > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > , " Marg " <margie9@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vinay > > > > > > you say: > > > > > > ''and some concepts of astrology an be traced back torock > > paintings of > > > > > even 30000 BC'' > > > > > > So these torock paintings exist, can be viewed and were first > > > > > discovered in India? > > > > > > Is there any other physical evidence in India to show recording > > of > > > > > planets or constellations? Pyramids, stone circles, caves with > > paintings > > > > > on the wall, or any other structures at all which demonstrate an > > ancient > > > > > Indian system of observing the heavens pre 250,000 BC? > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > M > > > > > > - > > > > > > Vinay Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:13 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fine question by Margie. The answer formed gist of my lecture at > > > > > Kalidasa Academy in April 2008 titled " Contribution of Indian > > Astrology > > > > > To the World Astrology " (in Hindi). The article, in Hindi, can be > > read > > > > > in full at my website. Here I can offer only a brief answer, which > > may > > > > > not satisfy readers. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indian Jyotisha is regarded as a Vedaanga (part of Veda). Since > > Vedas > > > > > are said to be composed after 1500 BC, its part cannot predate it. > > But > > > > > proofs of astrology with 12 house concept and other paraphernalia > > > > > existed in ancient civilizations around 3000 BC, and some concepts > > of > > > > > astrology an be traced back torock paintings of even 30000 BC. > > Hence, > > > > > the very topic " Contribution of Indian Astrology... " is > > meaningless, > > > > > unless we prove that the dating of Vedas should be advanced > > > > > considerably. This was how I introduced the topic, and then > > discussed > > > > > the unscientific method of comparative linguistics of 19th century > > > > > linguists. I devoted 12 years in this field. I found no concrete > > > > > evidence in favour of dating of the Vedas, only opinions were > > forwarded. > > > > > Rgvedic society was believed to be a pastoral one, and was > > therefore > > > > > held to be at par with Greeks at the time of Battle of Troy, which > > was > > > > > the earliest known historical event in the West. Hence, 1200 BC > > was said > > > > > to > > > > > > be the mean date of Rgveda. But when Michael Ventris proved that > > > > > Mycenaean Greeks enjoyed urban civilization around the middle of > > 2nd > > > > > millenium BC, it proved that their pastoral ancestors must have > > lived > > > > > befor 2000 BC. Taking into account the presence of Harappan > > > > > civilization, Rgvedic civilization could not be possible after > > 3000 BC, > > > > > if the logic of 19th century linguists was to be applied. > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, I applied the methods of modern linguistics, and assuming > > that > > > > > we do not know which IE branch was more archaic I applied equal > > > > > weightage to all major IE branches, and took statistical averages > > for > > > > > all consonants and vowels separately, and to my surprize found > > that the > > > > > PIE etymon exactly copied the Vedic form in almost all cases !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > Such a result contradicted the prevalent opinion. I had no doubt > > in > > > > > the accuracy of my results, because I checked it again and again > > for > > > > > years. For one month, I was profoundly disturbed. Then I decided > > to > > > > > carry on my research into historical semantics, and unexpectedly > > arrived > > > > > at far more bizarre conclusions. For instance, there is no root > > for > > > > > " brother " in any IE language. In the Rgveda, bhraatr and its > > derivatives > > > > > occur 33 times. At 32 places, it means " Sun " . At 33th instance, it > > is > > > > > used for 'Yama', who is a son of Sun as well as a brother of Yami. > > That > > > > > is why ancient grammarians deduced bhraatr from the root bhraash > > which > > > > > meant " to shine " . the meaning " brother " was a later development, a > > > > > Laukika (worldly) usage. > > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, Agni was derived from a root which meant " to move > > > > > tortuously " . The Vedic god Agni was believed to move tortuously to > > all > > > > > worlds, and was therefore believed to fetch oblations to all gods, > > and > > > > > was therefore eulogized as the real purohita. When works were > > being > > > > > formed out of roots, physical " fire " was absent, social " brother " > > was > > > > > absent. Only divine terms and meanings were present. Does it mean > > that > > > > > Veda preceded society and world ??? Atheists will laugh at such > > ideas, > > > > > but all ancient grammarians believed so. > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of proving my views, I have put forth the problem. Solve > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now come to the second proble. The concept of 12 astrological > > houses > > > > > existed in all ancient civilizations, from China and India to > > Sumer and > > > > > Egypt. In most societies, even their names had similar meanings > > and > > > > > significances. It points to some common origins. Where is that > > common > > > > > origin??? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna (ascendant) is defined as the rising point of ec loptic at > > > > > eastern horizon. it symbolizes Body and worldy life. opposite is > > 7th > > > > > house, which signifies Kaama (libido). Nishkaama state gives the > > state > > > > > of Videha, and Kaama gives bondage into Deha (flesh). Both have > > cause : > > > > > consequence relation. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house is maarkesh, cause of death, and opposite is Death > > (8th > > > > > house). Aparigraha and Indriya-nigraha gives deliverance from > > Death, > > > > > while wealth and sensory pleasures lead to death. Hence, senses > > and > > > > > wealth are related to maarkesh. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3rd house is paraakrama (valour, vigour) and opposite is the > > result ; > > > > > bhaagya (Fortune). > > > > > > > > > > > > At the foot lies Earth, the mother, and vehicle also lies below > > the > > > > > rider. Hence, 4th house is below. 10th house is heaven, Father, > > glory, > > > > > and the consequence of Land(4th house) in the form of State and > > Power. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th house is Vidyaa (knowledge) and opposite is its consequence > > : > > > > > > income / profit. 6thy house is enemy or disease and opposite is > > its > > > > > > result : loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, all 12 houses have cause : consequence relation between > > > > > contrasting and opposite houses. There is a discernible logical > > design > > > > > behind the concept of 12 houses, and this logic was present in the > > > > > common origin wherefrom this concept spread to other lands. > > > > > > > > > > > > The source of this common origin is not difficult to discern. As > > shown > > > > > above, the philosophy of Deha versus Kaama, and Videha versus > > Nishkaama > > > > > underlied the concepts behind first and seventh houses. Similarly, > > the > > > > > ideas of sensory pleasures and wealth being related to cause of > > death > > > > > and renunciation as a means of liberation from the cycles of death > > and > > > > > birth was behind the idea of 2nd and 8th houses. Such a philosophy > > > > > existed only in India. We cannot find such philosophies > > elesewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now come to the third point : Why physical remains are not found > > in > > > > > India. There are two causes . Their is no dearth of physical > > remains > > > > > related to non-Vedic but hindu (ie, Asuric) cultures, but there is > > a > > > > > lack of political will to accept the truth. For instance, the > > state > > > > > symbol of Magadha was solar chakra consisting of 24 spokes as 24 > > ritus. > > > > > It was adopted by Buddhism, and came to be known as Dhamma-chakka, > > > > > whence modern India adopted it as its emblem. These " experts " > > > > > deliberately forget that all punched-marked coins of Magadha right > > from > > > > > earliest times contain this sun sign. The concept of 24 ritus is > > Vedic. > > > > > But the second cause is more profound, and less marked. Real > > experts of > > > > > Vedic astrology used Suryasiddhanta whose planets differed from > > those of > > > > > physical astronomy and were believed to be deities , ie conscious > > > > > elements. Deities could not be seen through human eyes. Hence > > there was > > > > > no need of any observatory & c. But Drikpakshiya astronomy was not > > > > > > unknown, although it was not used in astrology by most > > astrologers. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is a mere summary, which will not satisfy many readers. the > > proof > > > > > of Indian astrology is neither logical discussion nor correlation > > with > > > > > physical astronomy, but predictive astrology, which is highly > > precise if > > > > > Suryasiddhantic mathematics is followed. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Marg margie9@ > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:42:05 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thankyou for your reply Vinay, you are so obviously an expert on > > many > > > > > cultures. Perhaps you can help me with a query? > > > > > > As you know there are signs all over the planet of star and moon > > > > > watching by ancient civilisations, and even astrological practise > > which > > > > > are constantly being rediscovered by archaeology. For instance in > > > > > Ireland there are caves thought to be inhabited circa 5000 BC > > which show > > > > > careful calculations of moon phases and star knowledge. We know > > the > > > > > Egyptians have star diagrams due to the engravings and paintings > > on > > > > > pyramid walls possible circa 2500BC and beyond. Reindeer and > > mammoth > > > > > tusks found on mainland Europe over 25,000 years old are known to > > have > > > > > notches on them which represent the phases of the moon. > > > > > > Yet I have no knowledge of anything similar being found in > > India, > > > > > which is odd when so many believe astrology was founded there > > don't you > > > > > think? > > > > > > I wonder if you know where in India there is similar physical > > evidence > > > > > of very early observation of the sky, not in a book, but actual > > > > > geographically located physical evidence of early skywatching? I > > would > > > > > really appreciate knowing this > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > M > > > > > > - > > > > > > Vinay Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:51 AM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Modern India still preserves the archaic culture and > > religion to a > > > > > great extent, but modern Greece or Iran or Egypt or Mesopotamia > > contain > > > > > only relics of the past. China officially disowns its cultural > > roots, > > > > > and does nor preserve pre-Confucian or pre-Buddhist culture. India > > is an > > > > > exception. Not even 1% of modern Indians fully adhere to the > > ancient > > > > > ways, but millions try to adhere to ancient norms... > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net> > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:10:56 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly modern Indians :-) > > > > > > - > > > > > > Vinay Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:13 AM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Modern Iranians cannot be said to represent the ancient > > Babylonians > > > > > culturally. > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net> > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:22:07 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear R > > > > > > I think the Babylonians aka Persians aka Iranians are still > > delivering > > > > > readings? > > > > > > - > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > Monday, March 30, 2009 3:21 AM > > > > > > Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > How many Babylonians are still giving astrology readings to > > those who > > > > > need same? > > > > > > > > > > > > How many Indians (by birth, soul-connections or otherwise!) are > > doing > > > > > the same? > > > > > > > > > > > > Case closed? > > > > > > > > > > > > For me it is! Karma = Action (not speeches and pontifications! ) > > > > > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 4, 2009 Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 Dear Sunilji,Recently my astrologer friend said that the exaltation of a planet in a house is meaningful only at specified degrees, is it true, or whether the belonging of a planet to a house itself is sufficient to shower at least some beneficial aspects to the native. As I have told you earlier I'm a novice to the subject and hence your expert views shall help me to learn further.with regards and respects - R.kannan , 04.04.2009 --- On Fri, 3/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>To: Cc: Date: Friday, 3 April, 2009, 1:21 PM Vinayji,1)You said QuoteHow physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ?UnquoteI thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha.2)You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say.3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4)Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet.5)Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement.6)You do not know the meaning of the phrase "good riddance". When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said "good riddance"7)You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed?-SKB--- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!>Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM TO ALL : Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word "ayanamsha". 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical means Saurpakshiya Saayana. The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof.">>>> --- Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>>" You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini."<<<< << Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the "physical planet" ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can "torment" Rohini ? His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic." Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. His next point is >>>>"your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. "<<<< He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like "dirty tactics" , "you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic" , "bullshit" , 'unprovable tall claims", "left ignominiously" which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says "in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims." These "strong words" were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you." Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : "Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you." Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as "scientific" spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. -VJ ============ ==== ============ ==== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > 2) > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > 6) > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > -SKB > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > You say : "I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors." > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : "Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum." AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > You say : "I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and your > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > -VJ > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Dear Vinay jee, > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > regards/Bhaskar. Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 4, 2009 Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 Sunil ji, I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to decide the issue. I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these tables by rote in my school days ? You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute. You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special treatment. If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening properly, how will ever know my views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , but renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can substantiate. Good Wishes, -VJ ========================= ======================================= ________________________________ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya Cc: Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Vinayji, 1) You said Quote How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? Unquote I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. 2) You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say. 3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4) Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. 5) Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. 6) You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance " 7) You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed? -SKB --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM TO ALL : Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical means Saurpakshiya Saayana. The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> --- Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. -VJ ============ ==== ============ ==== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > 2) > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > 6) > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > -SKB > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and your > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > -VJ > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Dear Vinay jee, > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > regards/Bhaskar. > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. " > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > " > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > errors). > > > > and its accurate till prana > > dashas. > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > normally. > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > another time > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > -VJ > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ? > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ? > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present > > set up of mind. > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you. > > I have yet to see > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place, > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > Can Marg produce better references then these to claim that the West > > knew about astrology much before the Indians ? > > > > > > But before that, I suppose we would be asked wheres the signboard on > > the Adams bridge, written that it was the same bridge, and may also > > probably ask us additionally whether the Ramayana is authentic. And we > > are good people so we will never ask about the authenticity of the > > Bible, because I do believe in Jesus and love him probably more than > > Christians do. > > > > > > Or they may ask us how can You prove that the underwater city > > discovered in Dwarka is Krishnas city. And we may also be asked to prove > > that the Bhagwat was written by the ancients and not the modern day > > authors. > > > > > > Which is why I say that do not fall in trap of trying to impress the > > fairer sex, and neither try to show the greatness of your country or the > > origins of something which you have not studied about, properly. learn a > > subject properly before you try to attract somebody's attention and put > > your theories upon. If You have some light > > > then the brightness would be seen around you. No need to > > > prove it or show case it. Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > for you. I have yet to see your proficiency either in Astrology, > > Astronomy, or Mathematics. You have stirred the Hornests nest with no > > contribution, and no strong argument to take the None believers, which I > > have to settle for the dignity of my country, culture and love for > > astrology , single handedly. > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@ > > ....> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay, > > > > > > > > I would like you to predict here too on the groups so that all could > > witness your predictive abilities, which you mentioned in the below > > mail. But Computational and Mathematical skills are not required o be > > showcased, as I dont think anybody would be interested in that,this > > being an astrology Forum and not a maths one. > > > > > > > > By the way I am fighting your battle which you began here by trying > > to impress on Marg the origin of Indian vedic astrology which you could > > not. I have also fought for you in the past without any thanksgivings. > > One should go and try proving something which can be proved, or else not > > claim about anything. Otherwise one makes a fool of himself. And others > > have to defend him with their time and efforts. > > > > > > > > Nothing is going to be achieved by proving the origin to anybody. > > This is actually a waste of time. Instead of taking up easy and > > unverifiable issues , why not pick up some astrological principles and > > use them effectively here to show how you can predict so wonderfully as > > you have claimed in this mail. In this way the thread can become > > interesting and we all can learn from you. > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > A reader in Department of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University > > tested me before many scholars. Then the Head of Department of Grammar > > in the same university tested me (he asked me a simpler question : 786 > > raised to the power 8, which I answered within seconds without using > > paper or any tool. Then he replied that I must have used some tricks !!! > > It is impossible to satisfy such sceptics. If Sunil ji wants that I > > should stop my research work and become a madaari demonstrating my > > computational ability, he will be discouraged. > > > > > I am not Ramanujam, and I acquired some mathematical talents which > > I really needed. I learnt logarithmic and antilog tables and a lot more > > by rote in early boyhood. > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a@> > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 3:32:19 AM > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > You said that you can compute faster than a computer. In this age > > people want proof and do not want to believe in assertions because > > anybody can get away with assertions. So may I request you to get your > > computing power publicly demonstrated and reliably reported so that > > people will not doubt what you say. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 3/31/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 11:21 AM > > > > > > > > > > As I had suspected, Marg entirely missed the points raised by me, > > and is deliberately harping on physical proofs of what I say are > > metaphysical entities. Bhaskar ji can give her planetary positions > > without using any physical tools, and I can demonstrate that I can > > compute faster than a computer. Margie is not interested in knowing the > > marvels of Vedic astrology, and is more keen on proving the superiority > > of non-Indian astrology. Earlier too, I had tried to attract her > > attention towards secret methods of Vedic mundane astrology, but to no > > avail. Even if someone finds physical evidences of Indian or non-Indian > > astrology in 20000000 BC, it will help nobody. Veda and Vedic Astrology > > are parts of Eternal Religion (Sanatana Dharma), and religion is > > personal experience which can be taught and learnt only through a > > guru-shishya tradition. Sterile discussion will lead us nowhere. > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:36:16 PM > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > I can give you the planetary positions of any date in future > > sitting in > > > > > a closed room without going to a observatory or physical > > observation, or > > > > > access to any Table, Ephemeris, Computer or Almanac. That must be > > enough > > > > > proof of the Ancient Indian knowledge of observing the heavens, > > who had > > > > > after observing for centuries, and through their intellect , > > developed > > > > > so much analytical powers that even modern day astrologers like me > > can > > > > > make use of their findings and talk. What more further proof is > > > > > required ? I can also give geographical proof to a worthy and > > actual > > > > > serious enquirist who is unbiased. But otherwise would not like to > > > > > fritter this knowledge for the sake of some people who may wish to > > > > > collect this, and write a book in their name, and sell it for > > money . > > > > > But if I show someone a place and tell him that this existed in > > 2,50000 > > > > > BC, then how many will be able to test this , how many will have > > the > > > > > capacity and apparatus to test this. Or are they going to take the > > > > > bricks for Carbon testing ? For being accessible to such knowledge > > one > > > > > has to be a worthy and unsuspecting invitee who must not have any > > qualms > > > > > of prejudices of " My country " or " Your country " etc. > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > , " Marg " <margie9@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Vinay > > > > > > you say: > > > > > > ''and some concepts of astrology an be traced back torock > > paintings of > > > > > even 30000 BC'' > > > > > > So these torock paintings exist, can be viewed and were first > > > > > discovered in India? > > > > > > Is there any other physical evidence in India to show recording > > of > > > > > planets or constellations? Pyramids, stone circles, caves with > > paintings > > > > > on the wall, or any other structures at all which demonstrate an > > ancient > > > > > Indian system of observing the heavens pre 250,000 BC? > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > M > > > > > > - > > > > > > Vinay Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:13 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fine question by Margie. The answer formed gist of my lecture at > > > > > Kalidasa Academy in April 2008 titled " Contribution of Indian > > Astrology > > > > > To the World Astrology " (in Hindi). The article, in Hindi, can be > > read > > > > > in full at my website. Here I can offer only a brief answer, which > > may > > > > > not satisfy readers. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indian Jyotisha is regarded as a Vedaanga (part of Veda). Since > > Vedas > > > > > are said to be composed after 1500 BC, its part cannot predate it. > > But > > > > > proofs of astrology with 12 house concept and other paraphernalia > > > > > existed in ancient civilizations around 3000 BC, and some concepts > > of > > > > > astrology an be traced back torock paintings of even 30000 BC. > > Hence, > > > > > the very topic " Contribution of Indian Astrology... " is > > meaningless, > > > > > unless we prove that the dating of Vedas should be advanced > > > > > considerably. This was how I introduced the topic, and then > > discussed > > > > > the unscientific method of comparative linguistics of 19th century > > > > > linguists. I devoted 12 years in this field. I found no concrete > > > > > evidence in favour of dating of the Vedas, only opinions were > > forwarded. > > > > > Rgvedic society was believed to be a pastoral one, and was > > therefore > > > > > held to be at par with Greeks at the time of Battle of Troy, which > > was > > > > > the earliest known historical event in the West. Hence, 1200 BC > > was said > > > > > to > > > > > > be the mean date of Rgveda. But when Michael Ventris proved that > > > > > Mycenaean Greeks enjoyed urban civilization around the middle of > > 2nd > > > > > millenium BC, it proved that their pastoral ancestors must have > > lived > > > > > befor 2000 BC. Taking into account the presence of Harappan > > > > > civilization, Rgvedic civilization could not be possible after > > 3000 BC, > > > > > if the logic of 19th century linguists was to be applied. > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, I applied the methods of modern linguistics, and assuming > > that > > > > > we do not know which IE branch was more archaic I applied equal > > > > > weightage to all major IE branches, and took statistical averages > > for > > > > > all consonants and vowels separately, and to my surprize found > > that the > > > > > PIE etymon exactly copied the Vedic form in almost all cases !!! > > > > > > > > > > > > Such a result contradicted the prevalent opinion. I had no doubt > > in > > > > > the accuracy of my results, because I checked it again and again > > for > > > > > years. For one month, I was profoundly disturbed. Then I decided > > to > > > > > carry on my research into historical semantics, and unexpectedly > > arrived > > > > > at far more bizarre conclusions. For instance, there is no root > > for > > > > > " brother " in any IE language. In the Rgveda, bhraatr and its > > derivatives > > > > > occur 33 times. At 32 places, it means " Sun " . At 33th instance, it > > is > > > > > used for 'Yama', who is a son of Sun as well as a brother of Yami. > > That > > > > > is why ancient grammarians deduced bhraatr from the root bhraash > > which > > > > > meant " to shine " . the meaning " brother " was a later development, a > > > > > Laukika (worldly) usage. > > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, Agni was derived from a root which meant " to move > > > > > tortuously " . The Vedic god Agni was believed to move tortuously to > > all > > > > > worlds, and was therefore believed to fetch oblations to all gods, > > and > > > > > was therefore eulogized as the real purohita. When works were > > being > > > > > formed out of roots, physical " fire " was absent, social " brother " > > was > > > > > absent. Only divine terms and meanings were present. Does it mean > > that > > > > > Veda preceded society and world ??? Atheists will laugh at such > > ideas, > > > > > but all ancient grammarians believed so. > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of proving my views, I have put forth the problem. Solve > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now come to the second proble. The concept of 12 astrological > > houses > > > > > existed in all ancient civilizations, from China and India to > > Sumer and > > > > > Egypt. In most societies, even their names had similar meanings > > and > > > > > significances. It points to some common origins. Where is that > > common > > > > > origin??? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna (ascendant) is defined as the rising point of ec loptic at > > > > > eastern horizon. it symbolizes Body and worldy life. opposite is > > 7th > > > > > house, which signifies Kaama (libido). Nishkaama state gives the > > state > > > > > of Videha, and Kaama gives bondage into Deha (flesh). Both have > > cause : > > > > > consequence relation. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house is maarkesh, cause of death, and opposite is Death > > (8th > > > > > house). Aparigraha and Indriya-nigraha gives deliverance from > > Death, > > > > > while wealth and sensory pleasures lead to death. Hence, senses > > and > > > > > wealth are related to maarkesh. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3rd house is paraakrama (valour, vigour) and opposite is the > > result ; > > > > > bhaagya (Fortune). > > > > > > > > > > > > At the foot lies Earth, the mother, and vehicle also lies below > > the > > > > > rider. Hence, 4th house is below. 10th house is heaven, Father, > > glory, > > > > > and the consequence of Land(4th house) in the form of State and > > Power. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th house is Vidyaa (knowledge) and opposite is its consequence > > : > > > > > > income / profit. 6thy house is enemy or disease and opposite is > > its > > > > > > result : loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, all 12 houses have cause : consequence relation between > > > > > contrasting and opposite houses. There is a discernible logical > > design > > > > > behind the concept of 12 houses, and this logic was present in the > > > > > common origin wherefrom this concept spread to other lands. > > > > > > > > > > > > The source of this common origin is not difficult to discern. As > > shown > > > > > above, the philosophy of Deha versus Kaama, and Videha versus > > Nishkaama > > > > > underlied the concepts behind first and seventh houses. Similarly, > > the > > > > > ideas of sensory pleasures and wealth being related to cause of > > death > > > > > and renunciation as a means of liberation from the cycles of death > > and > > > > > birth was behind the idea of 2nd and 8th houses. Such a philosophy > > > > > existed only in India. We cannot find such philosophies > > elesewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now come to the third point : Why physical remains are not found > > in > > > > > India. There are two causes . Their is no dearth of physical > > remains > > > > > related to non-Vedic but hindu (ie, Asuric) cultures, but there is > > a > > > > > lack of political will to accept the truth. For instance, the > > state > > > > > symbol of Magadha was solar chakra consisting of 24 spokes as 24 > > ritus. > > > > > It was adopted by Buddhism, and came to be known as Dhamma-chakka, > > > > > whence modern India adopted it as its emblem. These " experts " > > > > > deliberately forget that all punched-marked coins of Magadha right > > from > > > > > earliest times contain this sun sign. The concept of 24 ritus is > > Vedic. > > > > > But the second cause is more profound, and less marked. Real > > experts of > > > > > Vedic astrology used Suryasiddhanta whose planets differed from > > those of > > > > > physical astronomy and were believed to be deities , ie conscious > > > > > elements. Deities could not be seen through human eyes. Hence > > there was > > > > > no need of any observatory & c. But Drikpakshiya astronomy was not > > > > > > unknown, although it was not used in astrology by most > > astrologers. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is a mere summary, which will not satisfy many readers. the > > proof > > > > > of Indian astrology is neither logical discussion nor correlation > > with > > > > > physical astronomy, but predictive astrology, which is highly > > precise if > > > > > Suryasiddhantic mathematics is followed. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Marg margie9@ > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:42:05 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thankyou for your reply Vinay, you are so obviously an expert on > > many > > > > > cultures. Perhaps you can help me with a query? > > > > > > As you know there are signs all over the planet of star and moon > > > > > watching by ancient civilisations, and even astrological practise > > which > > > > > are constantly being rediscovered by archaeology. For instance in > > > > > Ireland there are caves thought to be inhabited circa 5000 BC > > which show > > > > > careful calculations of moon phases and star knowledge. We know > > the > > > > > Egyptians have star diagrams due to the engravings and paintings > > on > > > > > pyramid walls possible circa 2500BC and beyond. Reindeer and > > mammoth > > > > > tusks found on mainland Europe over 25,000 years old are known to > > have > > > > > notches on them which represent the phases of the moon. > > > > > > Yet I have no knowledge of anything similar being found in > > India, > > > > > which is odd when so many believe astrology was founded there > > don't you > > > > > think? > > > > > > I wonder if you know where in India there is similar physical > > evidence > > > > > of very early observation of the sky, not in a book, but actual > > > > > geographically located physical evidence of early skywatching? I > > would > > > > > really appreciate knowing this > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > M > > > > > > - > > > > > > Vinay Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:51 AM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Modern India still preserves the archaic culture and > > religion to a > > > > > great extent, but modern Greece or Iran or Egypt or Mesopotamia > > contain > > > > > only relics of the past. China officially disowns its cultural > > roots, > > > > > and does nor preserve pre-Confucian or pre-Buddhist culture. India > > is an > > > > > exception. Not even 1% of modern Indians fully adhere to the > > ancient > > > > > ways, but millions try to adhere to ancient norms... > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net> > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:10:56 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly modern Indians :-) > > > > > > - > > > > > > Vinay Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:13 AM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Modern Iranians cannot be said to represent the ancient > > Babylonians > > > > > culturally. > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Marg margie9 (AT) talktalk (DOT) net> > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:22:07 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear R > > > > > > I think the Babylonians aka Persians aka Iranians are still > > delivering > > > > > readings? > > > > > > - > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > Monday, March 30, 2009 3:21 AM > > > > > > Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > How many Babylonians are still giving astrology readings to > > those who > > > > > need same? > > > > > > > > > > > > How many Indians (by birth, soul-connections or otherwise!) are > > doing > > > > > the same? > > > > > > > > > > > > Case closed? > > > > > > > > > > > > For me it is! Karma = Action (not speeches and pontifications! ) > > > > > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 4, 2009 Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 Dear Kannan ji, Though this mail was addressed to Shri Sunilji, I would like to participate for once as Sunilji is a very knowledgable person and let me take this query as a junior who can save him him this much efforts being a very basic query. When we go to attend a function of honour where you may be a invitee You will notice that the first few rows of the chairs near the Stage or dias are reserved normally. The Chief guest or the Guest of Honour will usually be seated there. This is the Exaltation degree of the particular inviitee seated there. Though he may be a member and part of the same audience , yet he will be Exalted. Treat the auditorium as the House and the front row of chairs as the Exaltation degrees where if a planet is seated., is known ad Exalted. You must have heard of the House of Commons in USA. It is just like the parliament in india. Now here may be 600+ members in the House of coomons, but one members is Exalted there. Why ? because he is also the Elected Speaker there, who can control the debates etc. whenever the House is in session. Treat the House of Commons as a House in the Horoscope, and treat the Speaker as a Exalted Planet. Your friend thus is right in his comments about the Exaltation degrees of the Planets. But one more point, where I would differ from your friend. Though any member of the House of Commons may not be the Speaker, yet being part of this House makes him important nevertheless, though not Exalted. You may ruminate on this. best wishes, Bhaskar. , kannan padma <kannan_padma30 wrote: > > Dear Sunilji, > > Recently my astrologer friend said that the exaltation of a planet in a house is meaningful only at specified degrees, is it true, or whether the belonging of a planet to a house itself is sufficient to shower at least some beneficial aspects to the native. As I have told you earlier I'm a novice to the subject and hence your expert views shall help me to learn further. > > with regards and respects - R.kannan , 04.04.2009 > > --- On Fri, 3/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya wrote: > Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Cc: > Friday, 3 April, 2009, 1:21 PM > > > > > > Vinayji, > > 1) > > You said > > Quote > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > Unquote > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > 2) > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you > to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say. > > 3) > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. > > 4) > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > 5) > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. > > 6) > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance " > > 7) > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not > character assassination. > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed? > > -SKB > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > TO ALL : > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in > common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > --- > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I > recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. > > > > -VJ > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > 1) > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > 2) > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > > > > > 6) > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to > know > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > your > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Check out the all-new Messenger 9.0! Go to http://in.messenger./ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 4, 2009 Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 Vinayji,I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu). When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in the reverse direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one Saptasindhu.When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that.I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations.Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2009 Report Share Posted April 5, 2009 Sunilji, You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong interpretation. Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; tropical year has less difference). You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such persons, how can I ? My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be interested in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for non-astrological nonsense. -VJ ________________________________ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya Cc: Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Vinayji, I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in the reverse direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one Saptasindhu. When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that. I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM Sunil ji, I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to decide the issue. I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these tables by rote in my school days ? You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute. You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special treatment. If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening properly, how will ever know my views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , but renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can substantiate. Good Wishes, -VJ ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= ____________ _________ _________ __ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Vinayji, 1) You said Quote How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? Unquote I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. 2) You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say. 3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4) Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. 5) Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. 6) You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance " 7) You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed? -SKB --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM TO ALL : Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical means Saurpakshiya Saayana. The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> --- Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. -VJ ============ ==== ============ ==== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > 2) > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > 6) > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > -SKB > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and your > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > -VJ > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Dear Vinay jee, > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > regards/Bhaskar. > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. " > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > " > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > errors). > > > > and its accurate till prana > > dashas. > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > normally. > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > another time > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > -VJ > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ? > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ? > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present > > set up of mind. > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you. > > I have yet to see > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place, > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > & gt% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2009 Report Share Posted April 5, 2009 Vinayji, 1) Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your Saurapaksha and drokpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your imaginary outpourings. 2) Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? -SKB --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 wrote: Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM Sunilji, You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong interpretation. Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; tropical year has less difference). You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such persons, how can I ? My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be interested in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for non-astrological nonsense. -VJ ____________ _________ _________ __ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Vinayji, I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in the reverse direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one Saptasindhu. When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that. I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM Sunil ji, I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to decide the issue. I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these tables by rote in my school days ? You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute. You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special treatment. If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening properly, how will ever know my views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , but renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can substantiate. Good Wishes, -VJ ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= ____________ _________ _________ __ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Vinayji, 1) You said Quote How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? Unquote I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. 2) You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say. 3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4) Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. 5) Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. 6) You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance " 7) You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed? -SKB --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM TO ALL : Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical means Saurpakshiya Saayana. The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> --- Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. -VJ ============ ==== ============ ==== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > 2) > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > 6) > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > -SKB > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good ast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2009 Report Share Posted April 5, 2009 Vinayji, 1) Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your imaginary outpourings. 2) Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? -SKB --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 wrote: Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM Sunilji, You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong interpretation. Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; tropical year has less difference). You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such persons, how can I ? My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be interested in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for non-astrological nonsense. -VJ ____________ _________ _________ __ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Vinayji, I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in the reverse direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one Saptasindhu. When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that. I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM Sunil ji, I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to decide the issue. I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these tables by rote in my school days ? You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute. You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special treatment. If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening properly, how will ever know my views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , but renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can substantiate. Good Wishes, -VJ ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= ____________ _________ _________ __ Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Vinayji, 1) You said Quote How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? Unquote I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. 2) You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say. 3) I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. 4) Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. 5) Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. 6) You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance " 7) You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed? -SKB --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM TO ALL : Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical means Saurpakshiya Saayana. The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> --- Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. -VJ ============ ==== ============ ==== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > 2) > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > 6) > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > -SKB > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and your > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > -VJ > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Dear Vinay jee, > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > regards/Bhaskar. > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. " > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > " > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > errors). > > > > and its accurate till prana > > dashas. > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > normally. > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > another time > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > -VJ > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ? > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ? > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present > > set up of mind. > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you. > > I have yet to see > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place, > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > & gt% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2009 Report Share Posted April 5, 2009 To ALL : Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A New Approach to Rain Forecasting " (http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecastin\ g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore) that I was a cheat ? To Sunil ji : You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his field of interest, I can only be amused. Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like Siddhaantatattvaviveka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements. Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its results. With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as astrological credentials ( http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\ epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Vinay_Jha http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\ ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my paper by CAOS, IISc. Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my veracity and started attacking me. Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works, you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ?? Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of interest. Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all forums. Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie, and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to acknowledge. Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from the root). -VJ ====================== =================== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote: > > Vinayji, > > 1) > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your imaginary outpourings. > > 2) > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > -SKB > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16 > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > Sunilji, > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong interpretation. > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; tropical year has less difference). > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such persons, how can I ? > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be interested > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for non-astrological nonsense. > > > > -VJ > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @> > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > Vinayji, > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it .. That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed here) appeared to move in the reverse > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more than one Saptasindhu. > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you just ignored that. > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your imaginary locations. > > > > Regards, > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of repute. > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special treatment. > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , but > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and can substantiate. > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > -VJ > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > Vinayji, > > > > 1) > > > > You said > > > > Quote > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > Unquote > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > 2) > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in what you say. > > > > 3) > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to believe in these claims of yours. > > > > 4) > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > 5) > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any reference to back your statement. > > > > 6) > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good riddance " > > > > 7) > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone unopposed? > > > > -SKB > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > TO ALL : > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of planets are concerned... > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > --- > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was merely a > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just because I know the practical methods of > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me obscene messages. > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the answers). > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not reject a thing before testing it. > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by force, or by means of abuses. > > > > -VJ > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from the topic > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth reading. > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but yourself made your position very precarious there and you left ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul language. > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > your > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( ??). > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and analysing. > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > another time > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the persons who > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You cannot > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost on the > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean who > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just broken > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention or > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on them ? > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought was a > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself then > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this Group ? > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have been > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the broken > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none have > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to prove > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in front > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss convincingly > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because I just > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I could > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your present > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ....> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is for you. > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. You > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he appears > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. He has > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I made > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and one > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil Bhattacharya > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. I > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. When I > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane Astrology of > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any discussion on > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need to > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and are > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators to > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my free > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, that > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one place, > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the bridge > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams bridge > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be believed > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time this > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the Ramayan > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that this > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the whole > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than this to > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now have to > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear all. 1) In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. I shall not insist on that hereafter. 2) Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also have taught Mayasura. 3) Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group about it with proof. 4) In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25 August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal attack on him. 5) Vinayji says Quote You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. Unquote Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is playing tricks with him. 6) He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. 7) Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or given in his own websites. 8) Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert that myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity to do so, for which I am thankful to them.However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? Regards nevertheless, Sunil. Bhattacharjya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Sunil bhai/Dada, I do not know your age but you sound older than me ... Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you shared with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to Vinayji. Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy and why should you think he should ours as well? At least in the post that I responded to? Rohiniranjan , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote: > > Dear all. > > > > 1) > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > 2) > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also > have taught Mayasura. > > 3) > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > about it with proof. > > 4) > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25 > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal > attack on him. > > > > 5) > > Vinayji says > > > > Quote > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > > > Unquote > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > playing tricks with him. > > 6) > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > 7) > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > given in his own websites. > > 8) > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert that > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore) > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements. > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > results. > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > astrological credentials ( > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works, > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ?? > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of > > interest. > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > forums. > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie, > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > acknowledge. > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from > > the root). > > > > -VJ > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > 1) > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > 2) > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > interested > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, > > except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 RR ji, Sunil ji is ~69 years old and is an expert in environmental engineering with qualification in Chemistry, and experience as manager and consultancy in environmental engineering. He is interested in indology and related topics. His differences with me started when he frustrated my attempts to discuss ancient astrology of Yaamala Tantras by diverting the discussion to benefits of wine in that topic of " Tantric Astrology " . He knew I could not discuss such things, and these things had no use in astrology, as far as I knew. Since then, he is devoting much of his time in harassing me and leveling false charges on me. He joined this forum merely to harass me. He sometimes discusses astrology with others, esp in AIA, but never with me. I really believe that he will forgive me only when I accept that wine is a good and divine thing, which I cannot. I do not want to discuss any topic with him. He uses bad words for me, levels false charges, and then asks me to answer his questions. I would have liked to answer these questions had he checked his offensive language. bad language. -VJ ============== ============== ============== , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani wrote: > > Sunil bhai/Dada, > > I do not know your age but you sound older than me ... > > Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you shared with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to Vinayji. > > Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy and why should you think he should ours as well? > > At least in the post that I responded to? > > Rohiniranjan > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote: > > > > Dear all. > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. > > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > > > 2) > > > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move > > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti > > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also > > have taught Mayasura. > > > > 3) > > > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling > > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the > > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have > > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > > about it with proof. > > > > 4) > > > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle > > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to > > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper > > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25 > > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year > > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) > > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer > > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to > > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. > > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way > > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter > > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine > > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal > > attack on him. > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > Vinayji says > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you > > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails > > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > > playing tricks with him. > > > > 6) > > > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others > > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this > > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability > > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to > > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran > > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > > > 7) > > > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that > > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that > > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > > given in his own websites. > > > > 8) > > > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not > > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to > > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot > > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything > > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a > > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of > > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that > > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession > > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that > > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji > > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested > > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting > > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may > > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his > > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic > > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if > > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have > > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish > > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I > > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in > > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he > > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just > > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am > > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert that > > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution > > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. > > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity > > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote: > > > > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here > > > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show > > > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has > > > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out > > > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A > > > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made > > > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore) > > > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never > > > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. > > > > > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail > > > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other > > > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of > > > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet > > > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without > > > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the > > > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make > > > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me > > > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will > > > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets > > > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord > > > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so > > > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements. > > > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and > > > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a > > > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > > > results. > > > > > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, > > > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want > > > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a > > > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about > > > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the > > > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward > > > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and > > > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to > > > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and > > > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned > > > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever > > > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again > > > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > > > astrological credentials ( > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my > > > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of > > > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works, > > > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss > > > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly > > > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing > > > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it > > > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. > > > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me > > > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never > > > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I > > > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of > > > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now > > > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of > > > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas > > > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on > > > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides > > > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life > > > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ?? > > > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of > > > > interest. > > > > > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to > > > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you > > > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want > > > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption > > > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > > > forums. > > > > > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in > > > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my > > > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie, > > > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be > > > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have > > > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it > > > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get > > > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real > > > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > > > acknowledge. > > > > > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your > > > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from > > > > the root). > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your > > > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the > > > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I > > > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt > > > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the > > > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the > > > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The > > > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as > > > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument > > > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong > > > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with > > > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical > > > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. > > > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical > > > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no > > > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical > > > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm > > > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at > > > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is > > > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon > > > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the > > > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; > > > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical > > > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I > > > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude > > > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and > > > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish > > > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe > > > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, > > > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on > > > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare > > > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest > > > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta > > > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, > > > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake > > > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to > > > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > > > interested > > > > > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I > > > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using > > > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for > > > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for > > > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from > > > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how > > > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of > > > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .. > > > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you > > > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are > > > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of > > > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the > > > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it > > > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy > > > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed > > > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the > > > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not > > > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he > > > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your > > > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and > > > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But > > > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened > > > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof > > > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which > > > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of > > > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical > > > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not > > > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse > > > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. > > > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided > > > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against > > > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other > > > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and > > > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It > > > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of > > > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did > > > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept > > > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never > > > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation > > > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was > > > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can > > > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, > > > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I > > > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I > > > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am > > > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over > > > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to > > > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views > > > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is > > > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here > > > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. > > > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew > > > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give > > > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, > > > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to > > > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion > > > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till > > > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an > > > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested > > > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. > > > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his > > > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that > > > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta > > > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views > > > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for > > > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh > > > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a > > > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted > > > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting > > > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. > > > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but > > > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and > > > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling > > > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It > > > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or > > > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, > > > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from > > > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am > > > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize > > > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused > > > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there > > > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing > > > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain > > > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, > > > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am > > > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and > > > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both > > > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when > > > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets > > > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that > > > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in > > > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a > > > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have > > > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required > > > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to > > > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets > > > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any > > > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you > > > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you > > > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body > > > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any > > > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you > > > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good > > > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. > > > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right > > > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to > > > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors > > > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong > > > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in > > > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I > > > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in > > > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are > > > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an > > > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for > > > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another > > > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, > > > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language > > > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material > > > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this > > > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of > > > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based > > > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. > > > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away > > > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. > > > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead > > > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is > > > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million > > > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates > > > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In > > > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has > > > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit > > > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing > > > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern > > > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in > > > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that > > > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no > > > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based > > > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no > > > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the > > > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in > > > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It > > > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is > > > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the > > > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that > > > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you > > > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to > > > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) > > > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and > > > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational > > > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog > > > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where > > > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a > > > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe > > > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in > > > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient > > > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and > > > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner > > > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa > > > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said > > > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while > > > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no > > > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief > > > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. > > > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, > > > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was > > > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real > > > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say > > > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a > > > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika > > > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to > > > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than > > > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, > > > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should > > > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by > > > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I > > > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often > > > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like > > > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from > > > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately > > > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he > > > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired > > > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at > > > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, > > > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. > > > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " > > > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used > > > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial > > > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought > > > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, > > > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that > > > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just > > > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely > > > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, > > > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the > > > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me > > > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr > > > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly > > > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a > > > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the > > > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good > > > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of > > > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in > > > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance > > > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the > > > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had > > > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another > > > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book > > > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which > > > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only > > > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these > > > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of > > > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as > > > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic > > > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will > > > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables > > > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I > > > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and > > > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a > > > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I > > > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something > > > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by > > > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from > > > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which > > > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata > > > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power > > > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing > > > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? > > > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > > > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that > > > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra > > > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra > > > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the > > > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. > > > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas > > > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do > > > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO > > > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun > > > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I > > > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty > > > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > > > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he > > > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his > > > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said > > > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get > > > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete > > > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced > > > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. > > > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we > > > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All > > > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I > > > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship > > > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had > > > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant > > > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but > > > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong > > > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which > > > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on > > > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India > > > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. > > > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be > > > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum > > > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never > > > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a > > > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were > > > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. > > > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I > > > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of > > > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined > > > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these > > > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy > > > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to > > > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based > > > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But > > > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to > > > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those > > > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my > > > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my > > > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to > > > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about > > > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my > > > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my > > > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on > > > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong > > > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. > > > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts > > > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, > > > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. > > > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started > > > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or > > > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian > > > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that > > > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of > > > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, > > > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg > > > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom > > > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements > > > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( > > > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, > > > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, > > > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which > > > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and > > > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the > > > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, > > > > except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers > > > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and > > > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually > > > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself > > > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups > > > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ....> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support > > > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons > > > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as > > > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 > > > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use > > > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost > > > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on > > > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought > > > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this > > > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in > > > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because > > > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. > > > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he > > > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. > > > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I > > > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and > > > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. > > > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my > > > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the > > > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the > > > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now > > > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear Vinay ji, Thanks for the information! In that case I shall continue to call him Dada! He excels in areas that are very close to my heart and ambition: Chemistry and Environment and I can tell that he has a sharp mind and has pretty much all that one needs to embrace and uphold astrology! That said, he is human, I am sure because ISPs do not give access to internet accounts without checking one's capability to pay! Just plain and simple pragmatic stuff! And he has an internet account! As do you and I! Simply humans? But does that make any of us less capable of thinking and communicating? << " ..Ass offossed to comnicating and so on so 4th...? " >> Please " sample " the fare that is laid out on the smorgasbord of INTERNET and let us count our blessings! Shall we...? Rohiniranjan , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > RR ji, > > Sunil ji is ~69 years old and is an expert in environmental engineering > with qualification in Chemistry, and experience as manager and > consultancy in environmental engineering. He is interested in indology > and related topics. His differences with me started when he frustrated > my attempts to discuss ancient astrology of Yaamala Tantras by diverting > the discussion to benefits of wine in that topic of " Tantric Astrology " . > He knew I could not discuss such things, and these things had no use in > astrology, as far as I knew. Since then, he is devoting much of his time > in harassing me and leveling false charges on me. He joined this forum > merely to harass me. He sometimes discusses astrology with others, esp > in AIA, but never with me. I really believe that he will forgive me only > when I accept that wine is a good and divine thing, which I cannot. I do > not want to discuss any topic with him. He uses bad words for me, levels > false charges, and then asks me to answer his questions. I would have > liked to answer these questions had he checked his offensive language. > > bad language. > > -VJ > ============== ============== ============== > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@> > wrote: > > > > Sunil bhai/Dada, > > > > I do not know your age but you sound older than me ... > > > > Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you > shared with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to > Vinayji. > > > > Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy > and why should you think he should ours as well? > > > > At least in the post that I responded to? > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote: > > > > > > Dear all. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > > > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of > Jyotisha. > > > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > > > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > > > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to > move > > > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to > Kunti > > > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > > > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could > also > > > have taught Mayasura. > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is > telling > > > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how > the > > > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could > have > > > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > > > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > > > about it with proof. > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year > cycle > > > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted > to > > > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > > > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > > > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > > > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a > paper > > > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > > > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, > 25 > > > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year > > > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > > > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same > point) > > > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any > astrologer > > > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes > to > > > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year > cycles. > > > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what > way > > > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year > Jupiter > > > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > > > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as > divine > > > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a > personal > > > attack on him. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > Vinayji says > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now > you > > > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > > > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing > me after getting this information. > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first > mails > > > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > > > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > > > playing tricks with him. > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. > Others > > > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > > > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by > this > > > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > > > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my > inability > > > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > > > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > > > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation > to > > > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a > veteran > > > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not > that > > > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate > that > > > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > > > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > > > given in his own websites. > > > > > > 8) > > > > > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > > > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > > > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do > not > > > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right > to > > > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > > > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we > cannot > > > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > > > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied > everything > > > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > > > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted > a > > > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge > of > > > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually > that > > > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > > > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any > profession > > > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > > > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned > that > > > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > > > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > > > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. > Kaulji > > > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only > protested > > > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am > protesting > > > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > > > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He > may > > > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > > > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > > > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > > > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from > his > > > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > > > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not > fatalistic > > > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > > > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > > > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > > > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > > > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail > if > > > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > > > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I > have > > > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > > > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > > > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > > > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. > Jyotish > > > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > > > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. > I > > > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work > in > > > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > > > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > > > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > > > > > > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his > admirers as he > > > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am > just > > > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I > am > > > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot > assert that > > > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any > contribution > > > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > > > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such > comparison. > > > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an > opportunity > > > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > > > > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not > made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a > number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific > and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in > big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents > to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling > your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > > > > > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > > > > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote: > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add > here > > > > > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to > show > > > > > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > > > > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > > > > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who > has > > > > > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > > > > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just > out > > > > > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper > " A > > > > > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > > > > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ > to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > > > > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India > made > > > > > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc > (Bangalore) > > > > > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > > > > > > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > > > > > > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you > never > > > > > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on > me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent > mail > > > > > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or > other > > > > > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and > some of > > > > > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > > > > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great > poet > > > > > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , > without > > > > > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > > > > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including > the > > > > > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to > make > > > > > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person > asks me > > > > > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > > > > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > > > > > > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > > > > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > > > > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they > will > > > > > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > > > > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > > > > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical > planets > > > > > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > > > > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that > Lord > > > > > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun > do so > > > > > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > > > > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false > statements. > > > > > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, > and > > > > > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of > such a > > > > > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with > me, > > > > > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately > want > > > > > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling > me a > > > > > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied > about > > > > > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > > > > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > > > > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of > the > > > > > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of > eastward > > > > > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > > > > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, > and > > > > > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this > information. > > > > > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution > to > > > > > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree > and > > > > > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world > renowned > > > > > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you > ever > > > > > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > > > > > > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " > again > > > > > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > > > > > astrological credentials ( > > > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ > %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > > > > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > > > > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ > to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > > > > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of > my > > > > > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness > of > > > > > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > > > > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my > works, > > > > > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > > > > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > > > > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to > discuss > > > > > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my > supposedly > > > > > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was > producing > > > > > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth > and it > > > > > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of > someone. > > > > > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking > me > > > > > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > > > > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > > > > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > > > > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > > > > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were > never > > > > > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field > ; I > > > > > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage > of > > > > > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. > Now > > > > > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > > > > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof > of > > > > > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two > tolas > > > > > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I > subsist on > > > > > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, > besides > > > > > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of > life > > > > > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to > me ?? > > > > > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > > > > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > > > > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields > of > > > > > > interest. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not > going to > > > > > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > > > > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told > you > > > > > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > > > > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not > want > > > > > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was > disruption > > > > > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > > > > > forums. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails > in > > > > > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show > my > > > > > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to > lie, > > > > > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to > be > > > > > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > > > > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you > have > > > > > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > > > > > > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > > > > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of > it > > > > > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never > get > > > > > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the > real > > > > > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > > > > > acknowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > > > > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > > > > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within > your > > > > > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > > > > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning > from > > > > > > the root). > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about > your > > > > > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > > > > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to > the > > > > > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words > while I > > > > > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to > disrupt > > > > > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > > > > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > > > > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent > the > > > > > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > > > > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be > the > > > > > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > > > > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. > The > > > > > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta > as > > > > > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false > argument > > > > > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly > wrong > > > > > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > > > > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > > > > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments > with > > > > > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > > > > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of > physical > > > > > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and > Moon. > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > > > > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to > synodical > > > > > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley > found no > > > > > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and > physical > > > > > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use > therm > > > > > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > > > > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > > > > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases > at > > > > > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference > is > > > > > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic > Moon > > > > > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between > the > > > > > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal > ; > > > > > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in > physical > > > > > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why > I > > > > > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > > > > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you > conclude > > > > > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses > and > > > > > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > > > > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > > > > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > > > > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your > foolish > > > > > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to > believe > > > > > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > > > > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal > discussion, > > > > > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis > on > > > > > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and > compare > > > > > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > > > > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > > > > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > > > > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > > > > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > > > > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > > > > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no > interest > > > > > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. > Suryasiddhanta > > > > > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical > astronomy, > > > > > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to > undertake > > > > > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes > to > > > > > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > > > > > interested > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > > > > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " > , I > > > > > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for > using > > > > > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > > > > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words > for > > > > > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place > for > > > > > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved > from > > > > > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > > > > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is > how > > > > > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream > of > > > > > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) > . > > > > > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > > > > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that > you > > > > > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you > are > > > > > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in > front of > > > > > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in > the > > > > > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you > mistranslated it > > > > > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so > stormy > > > > > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not > sataed > > > > > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > > > > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of > the > > > > > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > > > > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have > not > > > > > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > > > > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that > he > > > > > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > > > > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering > your > > > > > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > > > > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > > > > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns > and > > > > > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > > > > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. > But > > > > > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has > weakened > > > > > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > > > > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > > > > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only > proof > > > > > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > > > > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > > > > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, > which > > > > > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery > of > > > > > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a > magical > > > > > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > > > > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > > > > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > > > > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have > not > > > > > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > > > > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the > verse > > > > > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I > provided. > > > > > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I > provided > > > > > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks > against > > > > > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any > other > > > > > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA > and > > > > > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for > ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your > inventiomn. It > > > > > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts > of > > > > > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you > did > > > > > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > > > > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > > > > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a > concept > > > > > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they > never > > > > > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as > trapidation > > > > > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and > was > > > > > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > > > > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I > can > > > > > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last > time, > > > > > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > > > > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as > I > > > > > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > > > > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what > I > > > > > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs > I am > > > > > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time > over > > > > > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you > to > > > > > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my > views > > > > > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > > > > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > > > > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It > is > > > > > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts > here > > > > > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > > > > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > > > > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > > > > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to > me. > > > > > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin > anew > > > > > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to > give > > > > > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless > matters, > > > > > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me > to > > > > > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low > opinion > > > > > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari > till > > > > > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be > an > > > > > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh > requested > > > > > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but > failed. > > > > > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss > his > > > > > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn > that > > > > > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of > Suryasiddhanta > > > > > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his > views > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him > for > > > > > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and > Sreenadh > > > > > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided > a > > > > > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > > > > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was > diverted > > > > > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > > > > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > > > > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > > > > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > > > > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by > diverting > > > > > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before > answering. > > > > > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, > but > > > > > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > > > > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > > > > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > > > > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum > and > > > > > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not > belittling > > > > > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > > > > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English > literature , > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > > > > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > > > > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. > It > > > > > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, > or > > > > > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal > feuds, > > > > > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > > > > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > > > > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not > from > > > > > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, > I am > > > > > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > > > > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you > eulogize > > > > > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you > abused > > > > > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > > > > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices > about > > > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but > there > > > > > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not > abusing > > > > > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > > > > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in > vain > > > > > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > > > > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric > astrology, > > > > > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i > am > > > > > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well > and > > > > > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= > ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > > > > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > > > > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as > both > > > > > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > > > > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena > when > > > > > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > > > > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > > > > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > > > > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She > gets > > > > > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said > that > > > > > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe > in > > > > > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to > Manu a > > > > > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > > > > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you > have > > > > > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > > > > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > > > > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the > required > > > > > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted > all to > > > > > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical > planets > > > > > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in > any > > > > > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do > you > > > > > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told > you > > > > > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > > > > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his > body > > > > > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > > > > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give > any > > > > > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When > you > > > > > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said > " good > > > > > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your > liking. > > > > > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > > > > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are > right > > > > > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known > to > > > > > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these > professors > > > > > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under > wrong > > > > > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my > name in > > > > > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me > that I > > > > > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of > wine in > > > > > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you > are > > > > > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > > > > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to > forge an > > > > > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > > > > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time > for > > > > > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > > > > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > > > > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to > another > > > > > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is > Saurpaksha, > > > > > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > > > > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other > language > > > > > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > > > > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the > material > > > > > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > > > > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with > this > > > > > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher > world of > > > > > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > > > > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally > based > > > > > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal > world. > > > > > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept > away > > > > > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for > planets. > > > > > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical > dead > > > > > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > > > > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun > is > > > > > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 > million > > > > > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world > rotates > > > > > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. > In > > > > > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > > > > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > > > > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy > has > > > > > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the > Sanskrit > > > > > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started > imposing > > > > > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > > > > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this > modern > > > > > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > > > > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be > zero in > > > > > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded > that > > > > > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > > > > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > > > > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There > is no > > > > > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is > based > > > > > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > > > > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > > > > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had > no > > > > > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > > > > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in > the > > > > > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers > in > > > > > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. > It > > > > > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > > > > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > > > > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and > is > > > > > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > > > > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is > the > > > > > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > > > > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > > > > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say > that > > > > > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > > > > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will > you > > > > > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim > to > > > > > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > > > > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > location) > > > > > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > > > > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, > and > > > > > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > > > > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > > > > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my > computational > > > > > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > > > > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > > > > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and > antilog > > > > > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university > where > > > > > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > > > > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want > a > > > > > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the > globe > > > > > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil > Bhattacharya > > > > > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > > > > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses > in > > > > > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > > > > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > > > > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > ancient > > > > > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras > and > > > > > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > > > > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > > > > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > > > > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > > > > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted > manner > > > > > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when > Ashwatthaamaa > > > > > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna > said > > > > > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, > while > > > > > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > > > > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is > no > > > > > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a > brief > > > > > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during > war. > > > > > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one > offspring, > > > > > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama > was > > > > > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > > > > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > > > > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > > > > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a > real > > > > > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee > say > > > > > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya > as a > > > > > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > > > > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and > taamasika > > > > > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > > > > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free > to > > > > > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse > than > > > > > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , > meat, > > > > > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > > > > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > > > > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he > should > > > > > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused > by > > > > > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as > I > > > > > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and > often > > > > > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words > like > > > > > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > from > > > > > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > > > > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > > > > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his > deliberately > > > > > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > > > > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when > he > > > > > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > > > > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were > hired > > > > > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything > at > > > > > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > > > > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > > > > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact > CAOS, > > > > > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign > me. > > > > > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words > in > > > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall > claims. " > > > > > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji > used > > > > > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his > initial > > > > > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > > > > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never > thought > > > > > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against > me, > > > > > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized > that > > > > > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me > just > > > > > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and > falsely > > > > > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting > him, > > > > > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left > the > > > > > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent > me > > > > > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > > > > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > > > > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh > and Mr > > > > > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter > calmly > > > > > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for > a > > > > > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing > me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and > the > > > > > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really > good > > > > > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a > point of > > > > > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > > > > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > > > > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and > in > > > > > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a > chance > > > > > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing > the > > > > > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > > > > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. > Had > > > > > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > > > > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > > > > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, > another > > > > > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my > book > > > > > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > > > > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > > > > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge > which > > > > > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > > > > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, > only > > > > > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > > > > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set > these > > > > > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get > rid of > > > > > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > > > > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional > astrology as > > > > > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > > > > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill > Suryasiddhantic > > > > > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and > will > > > > > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined > tables > > > > > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > > > > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > > > > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > > > > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. > I > > > > > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges > and > > > > > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I > am a > > > > > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? > I > > > > > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding > something > > > > > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced > by > > > > > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different > from > > > > > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > > > > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge > which > > > > > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the > Mahabharata > > > > > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > > > > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing > power > > > > > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you > computing > > > > > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > > > > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a > madaari(ni)? > > > > > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > > > > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving > exit > > > > > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying > that > > > > > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > > > > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in > Tantra > > > > > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that > Tantra > > > > > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also > the > > > > > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a > drop. > > > > > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only > two-Tolas > > > > > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > > > > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please > do > > > > > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted > WHO > > > > > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap > fun > > > > > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word > did I > > > > > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your > dirty > > > > > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > > > > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In > the > > > > > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > > > > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > > > > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > > > > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die > unless he > > > > > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool > his > > > > > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > > > > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > > > > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you > said > > > > > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't > get > > > > > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to > delete > > > > > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am > convinced > > > > > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > > > > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words > in > > > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall > claims. > > > > > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and > we > > > > > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. > All > > > > > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > > > > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In > fact I > > > > > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted > scholarship > > > > > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you > used > > > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > > > > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you > had > > > > > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very > tolerant > > > > > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group > but > > > > > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > > > > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > > > > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage > strong > > > > > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, > which > > > > > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back > doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > > > > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > > > > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but > on > > > > > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what > India > > > > > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can > change. > > > > > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > > > > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you > to be > > > > > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > > > > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only > forum > > > > > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > > > > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and > never > > > > > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started > such a > > > > > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you > were > > > > > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > > > > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a > researcher. > > > > > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because > I > > > > > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber > of > > > > > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > > > > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > > > > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > > > > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I > joined > > > > > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all > these > > > > > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern > astronomy > > > > > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison > to > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares > based > > > > > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > > > > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > > > > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. > But > > > > > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > > > > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying > to > > > > > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > > > > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > > > > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from > those > > > > > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on > my > > > > > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing > my > > > > > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > > > > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > > > > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets > to > > > > > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > > > > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa > about > > > > > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > > > > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using > my > > > > > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > > > > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste > my > > > > > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > > > > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in > AIA on > > > > > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a > lifelong > > > > > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a > discussion. > > > > > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric > texts > > > > > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > > > > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi > chakra, > > > > > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was > destroyed. > > > > > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then > started > > > > > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me > or > > > > > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against > indian > > > > > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > > > > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see > that > > > > > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs > of > > > > > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > > > > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as > ignorant, > > > > > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that > Marg > > > > > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person > whom > > > > > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > > > > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these > statements > > > > > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your > goodeself ( > > > > > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of > same, > > > > > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me > Pompous, > > > > > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, > which > > > > > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > > > > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > > > > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, > and > > > > > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed > the > > > > > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give > us, > > > > > > except that by using your software we will become very good > astrologers > > > > > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, > and > > > > > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > > > > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > > > > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study > actually > > > > > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved > yourself > > > > > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various > groups > > > > > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > > > > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > ...> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > > > > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my > support > > > > > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > > > > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant > persons > > > > > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > > > > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > > > > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, > as > > > > > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only > for 1 > > > > > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > > > > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > > > > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > > > > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and > use > > > > > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being > negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > > > > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the > roost > > > > > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my > knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I > mean > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has > just > > > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to > mention > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours > on > > > > > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we > thought > > > > > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove > yourself > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of > indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of > this > > > > > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would > have > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from > the > > > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but > none > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > > > > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our > name in > > > > > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > > > > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, > because > > > > > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, > because I > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > > > > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have > started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message > is > > > > > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or > Mathematics. > > > > > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now > he > > > > > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his > certificates. > > > > > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and > says I > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta > and > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > > > > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to > abusers. > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep > quiet. > > > > > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > > > > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > > > > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no > need > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, > and > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the > moderators > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell > my > > > > > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana > here, > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > > > > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then > the > > > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > > > > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the > time > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with > the > > > > > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming > that > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what > the > > > > > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > > > > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of > astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would > now > > > > > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear Rohiniranjanji, I am sixty eight years old. I heard about you and I will be glad if you kindly let me know about your age etc. After my M.Sc. in Chemistry I underwent one year's training course in the Atomic Energy Establishment, Trombay (now BARC) and then joined that organisation as a scientist. Thereafter I moved to Chemical Industry. Much later, ie. towards the end of my career, I changed my field to Environmental engineering. I have interest in Indian Philosophy, Ancient Indian History and in Jyotish Shastra. In Jyotish shastra I have equal interest interest in Hindu astronomy and Hindu astrology. But astrology is really a big subject and in that I am somewhat like a beginner but I have come to realize the utility of Astrlogy and see that sooner the world realises its value better it will be. Astrology ia a boon to the humanity and that is why, even though I am not an expert in astrology, I do not like anybody condemning astrology without any basis like Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul isdoing. I came to know about Shri Vinay Jha first time in the AIA forum and he somehow extricated himself from the bad situation he created for himself in the AIA. As Sreenadhji invited him to AIA he thought that everybody would worship him there without questioning. He claimed that he alone has the secret knowledge of Suryasiddhanta and he went on telling about such things, which he could not substantiate. However he was in for surprise as AIA, like any other sensible fora, the AIA members would not tolerate any baseless statement. I too feel now that there is no point in responding to his mails. If anybody is interested the old mails of the groups are there to refer to. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Sun, 4/5/09, Rohiniranjan <jyotish_vani wrote: Rohiniranjan <jyotish_vani Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Sunday, April 5, 2009, 7:28 PM Sunil bhai/Dada, I do not know your age but you sound older than me ... Why is this Vinayji becoming so important to you? Each point that you shared with this forum of thousands of us ants -- had a reference to Vinayji. Who is this " Vinayji " who claims so much of your attention and energy and why should you think he should ours as well? At least in the post that I responded to? Rohiniranjan , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Dear all. > > > > 1) > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > 2) > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also > have taught Mayasura. > > 3) > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > about it with proof. > > 4) > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25 > August,2003) , where the authors were saying about the 60-year > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal > attack on him. > > > > 5) > > Vinayji says > > > > Quote > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > > > Unquote > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > playing tricks with him. > > 6) > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > 7) > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > given in his own websites. > > 8) > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert that > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore) > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements. > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > results. > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > astrological credentials ( > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works, > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ?? > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of > > interest. > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > forums. > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie, > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > acknowledge. > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from > > the root). > > > > -VJ > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > 1) > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > 2) > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > interested > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, > > except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 To All : Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence I am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some important issues) : (1) He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want to consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the very purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older contributions to another forum : http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58522 http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58483 http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58486 I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own website (cf.http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/sitemap ). I tried in vain to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank Chandrahari jifor forgetting me. (2) Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ? 3) I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really interested ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some 19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any foreigner). 4) Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a personalattack on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack on me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence, 61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I mentioned that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9 references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian years equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand that Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5 revolutions). The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji, but it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging. Sunil ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that 59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at : http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\ ?t=anon In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions in earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April, after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown in Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistorting my findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's cycle, yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who presented old theory in new form. In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before me.In the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent to 615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention that my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch of NASA headquarters : http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\ epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like " cheat,fool " etc for me again and again. In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did Iexplain the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there that " Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because this concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. " Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because I refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could not find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic teleconnections isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be opened, literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly, rainfall to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is much more strong and persistent thanpredictor-rainfall correlations , and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . " The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation.... " provides a key to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase " which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they did in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then, chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me. Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg, difference between 59.3 and 61) ? 7) Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals ; but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on Suryasiddhanta in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in its panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas, I will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by referrees whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to his ignorance. 8) Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji, Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh, clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and ancient sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons. Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research : I am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and mathematics comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a difference of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and 59.305 solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at the same point " after 60 years ! Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to a healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon cycles and some other important things. He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji's articles are peers and those who accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to help him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of Chandrahariji's articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being ignorant of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf. http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials ) : that HOD was later removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ?? If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as I did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the cause for which I care. I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it ?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle (explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained), but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I do not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed it out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The 60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not attested it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of those facts ??? -VJ ================== ================== ================== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote: > > Dear all. > > > > 1) > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > 2) > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also > have taught Mayasura. > > 3) > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > about it with proof. > > 4) > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25 > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal > attack on him. > > > > 5) > > Vinayji says > > > > Quote > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > > > Unquote > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > playing tricks with him. > > 6) > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > 7) > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > given in his own websites. > > 8) > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert that > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16 > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore) > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements. > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > results. > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > astrological credentials ( > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works, > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ?? > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of > > interest. > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > forums. > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie, > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > acknowledge. > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from > > the root). > > > > -VJ > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > 1) > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > 2) > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > interested > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, > > except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ....> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear Vinay ji, //Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh,clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and astrology// I have requested you previously too, and doing it yet once again, to please give me the relevant shloka numbers in both MBh of Vyasa, as well as Manusrmiti by Manu. Please do not give any other explanation-coments-contents apart from what is being asked for. regards, Bhaskar. , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > To All : > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence I > am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some > important issues) : > > (1) > He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport > his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the > name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want to > consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the very > purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs > of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner. This > cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not > want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously > interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members > here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older > contributions to another forum : > http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58522 > http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58483 > http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58486 > > I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own > website (cf.http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/sitemap ). I tried in vain > to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil > ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank > Chandrahari jifor forgetting me. > > (2) > Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have > taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern > atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original > texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ? > > 3) > I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse > byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but > modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really interested > ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some > 19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any > foreigner). > > 4) > Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a personalattack > on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack on > me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In > group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection > of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that > Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years > and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence, > 61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I mentioned > that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9 > references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji > says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter > meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian years > equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point > after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand that > Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5 > revolutions). The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji, but > it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have > contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to > swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some > research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging. Sunil > ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that > 59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at : > http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\ \ > ?t=anon > > In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier > works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was > definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called > quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual > IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends > whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for > longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend > should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions in > earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of > dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April, > after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown in > Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic > phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to > inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistorting my > findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's cycle, > yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to > present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my > paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would > have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is > not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but > also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who > presented old theory in new form. > > In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and > italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April > whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before me.In > the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent to > 615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention that > my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch > of NASA headquarters : > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\ \ > epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc > > Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts > weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with > Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like " cheat,fool " > etc for me again and again. > > In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did Iexplain > the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there that > " Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because this > concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. " > > Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the > secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my > contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because I > refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could not > find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic teleconnections > isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any > reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more > attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in > order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be opened, > literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two > universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but > influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly, rainfall > to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is > much more strong and persistent thanpredictor-rainfall correlations , > and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . " > > The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation.... " provides a key > to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a > cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather > scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase " > which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which > predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they did > in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really > interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then, > chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me. > > Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is > not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on > astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he > claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg, difference > between 59.3 and 61) ? > > 7) > Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals ; > but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on Suryasiddhanta > in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in its > panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put > forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a > peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas, I > will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On > the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by referrees > whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions > were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were > experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which > Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to > his ignorance. > > 8) > Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing > memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple > priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji, > Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh, > clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas > who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and > astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and ancient > sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons. > > Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of > his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings > lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research : I > am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person > saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter > meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and mathematics > comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a difference > of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and 59.305 > solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at > the same point " after 60 years ! > > Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a > great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to a > healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he > must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his > messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon > cycles and some other important things. > > He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji's articles are peers and those who > accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to help > him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does > not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal > attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of > Chandrahariji's articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true > planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of > Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit > against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being ignorant > of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf. > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials ) : that HOD was later > removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji > continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I > withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my > worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we > not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ?? > > If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can > forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as I > did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad > word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the > cause for which I care. > > I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly > presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any > refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not > refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it > ?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle > (explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained), > but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I do > not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed it > out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The > 60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather > scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its > existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not attested > it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of > those facts ??? > > -VJ > ================== ================== ================== > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote: > > > > Dear all. > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. > > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > > > 2) > > > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move > > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to > Kunti > > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could > also > > have taught Mayasura. > > > > 3) > > > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling > > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how > the > > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have > > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > > about it with proof. > > > > 4) > > > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle > > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to > > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper > > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, > 25 > > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year > > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) > > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer > > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to > > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. > > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way > > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter > > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as > divine > > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal > > attack on him. > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > Vinayji says > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you > > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing > me after getting this information. > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails > > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > > playing tricks with him. > > > > 6) > > > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others > > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by > this > > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability > > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to > > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran > > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > > > 7) > > > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that > > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that > > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > > given in his own websites. > > > > 8) > > > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not > > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to > > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot > > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything > > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a > > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge > of > > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually > that > > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession > > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned > that > > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji > > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested > > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting > > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may > > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his > > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic > > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if > > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I > have > > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. > Jyotish > > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I > > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in > > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his > admirers as he > > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am > just > > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am > > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot > assert that > > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution > > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. > > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity > > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not > made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a > number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific > and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in > big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents > to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling > your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote: > > > > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add > here > > > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show > > > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who > has > > > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just > out > > > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper > " A > > > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ > to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made > > > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc > (Bangalore) > > > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never > > > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. > > > > > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail > > > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other > > > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some > of > > > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great > poet > > > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without > > > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the > > > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to > make > > > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks > me > > > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they > will > > > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical > planets > > > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that > Lord > > > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do > so > > > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false > statements. > > > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and > > > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such > a > > > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > > > results. > > > > > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, > > > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want > > > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me > a > > > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about > > > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the > > > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward > > > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and > > > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this > information. > > > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to > > > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and > > > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world > renowned > > > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever > > > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " > again > > > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > > > astrological credentials ( > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ > %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ > to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of > my > > > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of > > > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my > works, > > > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss > > > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly > > > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing > > > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and > it > > > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. > > > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me > > > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never > > > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; > I > > > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of > > > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. > Now > > > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof > of > > > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two > tolas > > > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist > on > > > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, > besides > > > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life > > > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me > ?? > > > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of > > > > interest. > > > > > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going > to > > > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you > > > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not > want > > > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was > disruption > > > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > > > forums. > > > > > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in > > > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my > > > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to > lie, > > > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to > be > > > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have > > > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it > > > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get > > > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the > real > > > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > > > acknowledge. > > > > > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within > your > > > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning > from > > > > the root). > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your > > > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the > > > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while > I > > > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt > > > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent > the > > > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the > > > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. > The > > > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as > > > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false > argument > > > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong > > > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments > with > > > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical > > > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. > > > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical > > > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found > no > > > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and > physical > > > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use > therm > > > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at > > > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference > is > > > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon > > > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between > the > > > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; > > > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical > > > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I > > > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you > conclude > > > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses > and > > > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish > > > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to > believe > > > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal > discussion, > > > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis > on > > > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare > > > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no > interest > > > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta > > > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical > astronomy, > > > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to > undertake > > > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to > > > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > > > interested > > > > > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , > I > > > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for > using > > > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words > for > > > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for > > > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved > from > > > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is > how > > > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of > > > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .. > > > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that > you > > > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you > are > > > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front > of > > > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the > > > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated > it > > > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy > > > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not > sataed > > > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the > > > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have > not > > > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he > > > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your > > > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns > and > > > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. > But > > > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened > > > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only > proof > > > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, > which > > > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery > of > > > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a > magical > > > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not > > > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse > > > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. > > > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided > > > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against > > > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other > > > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA > and > > > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for > ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. > It > > > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts > of > > > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did > > > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept > > > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they > never > > > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as > trapidation > > > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was > > > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I > can > > > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last > time, > > > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I > > > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I > > > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I > am > > > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time > over > > > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to > > > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views > > > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It > is > > > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here > > > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to > me. > > > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew > > > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to > give > > > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, > > > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me > to > > > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion > > > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari > till > > > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be > an > > > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested > > > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but > failed. > > > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his > > > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn > that > > > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta > > > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views > > > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him > for > > > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh > > > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a > > > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted > > > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting > > > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. > > > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, > but > > > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and > > > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not > belittling > > > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature > , > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. > It > > > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or > > > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal > feuds, > > > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from > > > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I > am > > > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize > > > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused > > > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but > there > > > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing > > > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain > > > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, > > > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i > am > > > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and > > > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= > ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both > > > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena > when > > > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets > > > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said > that > > > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe > in > > > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu > a > > > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you > have > > > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the > required > > > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all > to > > > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical > planets > > > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any > > > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you > > > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told > you > > > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his > body > > > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give > any > > > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you > > > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good > > > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your > liking. > > > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are > right > > > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to > > > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors > > > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under > wrong > > > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name > in > > > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that > I > > > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine > in > > > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are > > > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge > an > > > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time > for > > > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another > > > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, > > > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other > language > > > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the > material > > > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this > > > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world > of > > > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based > > > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. > > > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept > away > > > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. > > > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead > > > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is > > > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million > > > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world > rotates > > > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. > In > > > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has > > > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the > Sanskrit > > > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started > imposing > > > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this > modern > > > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero > in > > > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded > that > > > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is > no > > > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based > > > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no > > > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the > > > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in > > > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It > > > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and > is > > > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the > > > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that > > > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will > you > > > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to > > > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) > > > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, > and > > > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my > computational > > > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog > > > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where > > > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a > > > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the > globe > > > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil > Bhattacharya > > > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in > > > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient > > > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras > and > > > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner > > > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa > > > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said > > > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while > > > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is > no > > > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief > > > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. > > > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one > offspring, > > > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama > was > > > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real > > > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say > > > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as > a > > > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and > taamasika > > > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free > to > > > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than > > > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , > meat, > > > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should > > > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by > > > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I > > > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often > > > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words > like > > > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > from > > > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his > deliberately > > > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he > > > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were > hired > > > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything > at > > > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact > CAOS, > > > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. > > > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words > in > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall > claims. " > > > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji > used > > > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his > initial > > > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never > thought > > > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against > me, > > > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that > > > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me > just > > > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely > > > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting > him, > > > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the > > > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me > > > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and > Mr > > > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter > calmly > > > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a > > > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing > me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and > the > > > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really > good > > > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point > of > > > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in > > > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance > > > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the > > > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had > > > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, > another > > > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book > > > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which > > > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only > > > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these > > > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid > of > > > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology > as > > > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill > Suryasiddhantic > > > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will > > > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined > tables > > > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I > > > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and > > > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am > a > > > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I > > > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding > something > > > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced > by > > > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different > from > > > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge > which > > > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the > Mahabharata > > > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing > power > > > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you > computing > > > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a > madaari(ni)? > > > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving > exit > > > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that > > > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in > Tantra > > > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that > Tantra > > > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also > the > > > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a > drop. > > > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas > > > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do > > > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO > > > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun > > > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did > I > > > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty > > > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > > > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless > he > > > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his > > > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said > > > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't > get > > > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete > > > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am > convinced > > > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words > in > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall > claims. > > > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we > > > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. > All > > > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact > I > > > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted > scholarship > > > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you > used > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had > > > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant > > > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group > but > > > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage > strong > > > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which > > > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back > doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on > > > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what > India > > > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. > > > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to > be > > > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum > > > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and > never > > > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such > a > > > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were > > > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a > researcher. > > > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I > > > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of > > > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I > joined > > > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all > these > > > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy > > > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to > > > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares > based > > > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. > But > > > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying > to > > > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those > > > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my > > > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my > > > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets > to > > > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa > about > > > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my > > > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste > my > > > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA > on > > > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong > > > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a > discussion. > > > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric > texts > > > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, > > > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. > > > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then > started > > > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me > or > > > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against > indian > > > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that > > > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of > > > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as > ignorant, > > > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that > Marg > > > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person > whom > > > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these > statements > > > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself > ( > > > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of > same, > > > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, > > > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which > > > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, > and > > > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed > the > > > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, > > > > except that by using your software we will become very good > astrologers > > > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and > > > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study > actually > > > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself > > > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various > groups > > > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > ...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my > support > > > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons > > > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as > > > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for > 1 > > > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and > use > > > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being > negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost > > > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to > mention > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on > > > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought > > > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove > yourself > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of > indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this > > > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but > none > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name > in > > > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, > because > > > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because > I > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have > started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or > Mathematics. > > > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he > > > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his > certificates. > > > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says > I > > > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and > > > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to > abusers. > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep > quiet. > > > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no > need > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the > moderators > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell > my > > > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the > time > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the > > > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what > the > > > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now > > > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear All, My request to you is that please read Vinayji's paper on the 61 year-cycle and find out for yourself if he could really establish what he claims to have done. He has not given any substantive data to support his claim. He has not given any dates of any particular years in his paper to show that it is exactly 61 years and no more no less. But in case of the Jovian cycles he tells you as to how it differs from 60 years in terms of fraction of year. The 60-year monsoon cycle comes after 60 years on an average. For example the monsoon comes to Mumbai of 6th June but it is not that every year it comes there exactly on that same that. Vinayji failed to establish any exact-61-year cycle in his paper as he has skillfully avoided any dates and gave no repeat cycles. The paper is vague unlike the paper I quoted of the two scientists where they gave data in a graphical form of repeat cycles and one can see the correctness of the claims there. Vinayji has not proved anything concretely in his paper other than what is already known. His claim of exactly 61 years is not correct. One will have to give data for several such exactly consecutively occurring 61-year cycles over a period of at least two or three centuries to show that it really occurs at exactly 61- year intervals, with precise dates. Untill that is done any work like this is just tentative and does not disprove the 60-year cycle. He does not even know how to write a scientific paper properly and to report authentically. He has to realise that any paper cannot claim to be valuable just because it has been presented. First let him send any paper to a reputed journal and get it accepted. I am sure he does not know the date of Kalidasa as cannot write a single para to state what he thinks is the date of Kalidasa and he now wants all of you, who are interested to know the true date of kalidasa, to read Ritusamhara. He wants to evade the issue that way. by asking the group members to read the ritusamhara. His logic is poor and he is evasive. Vinayji is wrong when he says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers are not peer-reviewed. Chandrahariji has published several papers in peer-reviewed journals and Vinayji has none. Vinayji says Quote Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg, difference between 59.3 and 61) ? Unquote Then why he complains that I discuss astrology with others and not with him? For information of Vinayji when did I say that I am a Vetaran of Environmental science alone? He does not know to write a paper. Just by vaguely saying about one cycle of 61 years (that too without giving dates) he thinks that he has proved the 61-year cycle. What can be more reprehensible than that. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 wrote: vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16 Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Sunday, April 5, 2009, 10:41 PM To All : Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence I am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some important issues) : (1) He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want to consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the very purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older contributions to another forum : http://www.mysticbo ard.com/viewtopi c.php?t=58522 http://www.mysticbo ard.com/viewtopi c.php?t=58483 http://www.mysticbo ard.com/viewtopi c.php?t=58486 I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own website (cf.http://jyotirvid ya.wetpaint. com/sitemap ). I tried in vain to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank Chandrahari jifor forgetting me. (2) Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ? 3) I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really interested ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some 19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any foreigner). 4) Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a personalattack on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack on me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence, 61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I mentioned that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9 references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian years equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand that Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5 revolutions) . The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji, but it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging. Sunil ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that 59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at : http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\ ?t=anon In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions in earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April, after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown in Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistort ing my findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's cycle, yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who presented old theory in new form. In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before me.In the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent to 615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention that my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch of NASA headquarters : http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ acc\ epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like " cheat,fool " etc for me again and again. In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did Iexplain the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there that " Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because this concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. " Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because I refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could not find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic teleconnections isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be opened, literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly, rainfall to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is much more strong and persistent thanpredictor- rainfall correlations , and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . " The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation. ... " provides a key to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase " which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they did in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then, chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me. Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg, difference between 59.3 and 61) ? 7) Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals ; but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on Suryasiddhanta in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in its panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas, I will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by referrees whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to his ignorance. 8) Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji, Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh, clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and ancient sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons. Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research : I am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and mathematics comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a difference of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and 59.305 solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at the same point " after 60 years ! Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to a healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon cycles and some other important things. He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji' s articles are peers and those who accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to help him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of Chandrahariji' s articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being ignorant of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials ) : that HOD was later removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ?? If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as I did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the cause for which I care. I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it ?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle (explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained), but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I do not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed it out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The 60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not attested it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of those facts ??? -VJ ============ ====== ============ ====== ============ ====== , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Dear all. > > > > 1) > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > 2) > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to Kunti > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could also > have taught Mayasura. > > 3) > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how the > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > about it with proof. > > 4) > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, 25 > August,2003) , where the authors were saying about the 60-year > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as divine > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal > attack on him. > > > > 5) > > Vinayji says > > > > Quote > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > > > Unquote > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > playing tricks with him. > > 6) > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by this > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > 7) > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > given in his own websites. > > 8) > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge of > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually that > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I have > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. Jyotish > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his admirers as he > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am just > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot assert that > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ ... > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add here > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who has > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just out > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper " A > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc (Bangalore) > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some of > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great poet > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to make > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks me > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they will > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical planets > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that Lord > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do so > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false statements. > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such a > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > results. > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me a > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this information. > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world renowned > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " again > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > astrological credentials ( > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of my > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my works, > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and it > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; I > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. Now > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof of > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two tolas > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist on > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, besides > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me ?? > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of > > interest. > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going to > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not want > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was disruption > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > forums. > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to lie, > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to be > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the real > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > acknowledge. > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within your > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning from > > the root). > > > > -VJ > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > 1) > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > 2) > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while I > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent the > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. The > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false argument > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments with > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found no > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and physical > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use therm > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference is > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between the > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you conclude > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses and > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to believe > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal discussion, > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis on > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no interest > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical astronomy, > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to undertake > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > interested > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , I > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for using > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words for > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved from > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is how > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) . > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that you > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you are > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front of > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated it > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not sataed > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have not > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns and > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. But > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only proof > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, which > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery of > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a magical > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA and > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. It > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts of > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they never > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as trapidation > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I can > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last time, > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I am > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time over > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It is > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to me. > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to give > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me to > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari till > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be an > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but failed. > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn that > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him for > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, but > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not belittling > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature , > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. It > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal feuds, > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I am > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but there > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i am > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena when > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said that > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe in > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu a > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you have > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the required > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all to > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical planets > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told you > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his body > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give any > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your liking. > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are right > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under wrong > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name in > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that I > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine in > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge an > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time for > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other language > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the material > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world of > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept away > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world rotates > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. In > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the Sanskrit > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started imposing > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this modern > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero in > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded that > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is no > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and is > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will you > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, and > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my computational > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the globe > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras and > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is no > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one offspring, > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama was > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as a > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and taamasika > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free to > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , meat, > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words like > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit from > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his deliberately > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were hired > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything at > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact CAOS, > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. " > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji used > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his initial > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never thought > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against me, > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me just > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting him, > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and Mr > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter calmly > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and the > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really good > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point of > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, another > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid of > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology as > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill Suryasiddhantic > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined tables > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am a > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding something > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced by > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different from > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing power > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you computing > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a madaari(ni)? > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in Tantra > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that Tantra > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also the > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a drop. > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did I > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless he > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't get > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am convinced > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words in > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall claims. > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. All > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact I > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted scholarship > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you used > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group but > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage strong > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what India > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to be > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and never > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such a > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a researcher. > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I joined > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all these > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares based > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. But > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets to > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa about > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste my > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA on > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a discussion. > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric texts > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then started > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me or > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against indian > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as ignorant, > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that Marg > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person whom > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these statements > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself ( > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of same, > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, and > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed the > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, > > except that by using your software we will become very good astrologers > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study actually > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various groups > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ....> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my support > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for 1 > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and use > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to mention > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove yourself > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but none > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name in > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, because > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because I > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or Mathematics. > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his certificates. > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says I > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to abusers. > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep quiet. > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no need > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the moderators > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell my > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the time > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what the > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear Vinay ji, I have not entered the thread for some time because I understood the futility of the same, since nothing is expounded here except invitations to your site through various means. Most of the astrologers in these Groups are doing astrology for a living, so they are " Chandalas " as per your dictum (Since you have yet to prove that Vyasji or Manu said so) . I do not understand that what a good man like you then, is doing in this assembly of chandalas. Why must you try to impress upon Chandalas of your great academic achievemnets. Why do you need recognitions here in these groups ? Why dont you find exalted groups where people who are of very intelligent levels , and not chandalas, are present in the groups. Vinayji You are going the same way where Kaulji went. Nobody regards him seriously anymore for he has always spoken against astrologers ,Vedas, ancestors and the great men of india. Which is why he does not demand respect or an ear anymore though he may be having probably better astronomical knowledge then most of us . You are now following the same footsteps. You want some praise, respect, and recognitions in the assembly of astrologers, whom you call as " Chandalas " ? This is ironic . This is also akin to going to a Doctor for treatment who charges you money for the treatment, but whom you cannot call a " Chandala " out of fear. But here you are free to do so . This is hypocritical behaviour and must be shunned immediately. You will go to Tirupati and the great temples of india, but will not have the guts to tell the Poojari there that " You are a Chandala " because you accept this money for your living. You will get a Pooja and a Yagna done for marriage of some family member but will not tell the Pundit whom you give " Dakshina " , that You are a Chandala. This is hypocrticial. You also mentioned about only the distressed persons going to temples or getting poojas done ? Mr.Vinay speak only for yourself and not on behalf of others. I have always gone to the temple to thank the Lord for what he has given me, and I have also done poojas, Homa performed when I had nothing in particular to ask from God, but just done so so that the air at Home is purified, and some money reaches a Brahmins pockets which is the duty of every grihasta. I do not find Mr.Sunilji abusing anybody and at anytime, except you abusing everyone who does not accept, whatever you wish to convey, which is still not understood uptil now. Your lengthy mails nothing to me, I ask for actual action instead of essays, and thesis which leads nowhere. Your lengthy mails are talks of those theroetical teachers who want to teach one how to swim, but who themselves have never stepped in water. Or you must have heard the story of a Big Preacher trying to teach the boatsman about God, but when heavy rains came and the boat overturned all that big talk went to nought since the Preacher did not know how to swim, had himself no faith in the Lord, and was thus drowned while the humble boatsman swam to the shore. My Dear people like me who do not have so much Titles and degrees (like you possess and invite everybody to see on your wesbite on every pretext you may cling hold to), people like me are much better , because I have something to offer which i did - How to calculate the planetary positions for any date sitting in a closed room with no aids of any kind, but just with use of Sanskrit formulas . People like you have got lots of knowledge , many Titles, many papers, many great acheievments, but unfortunately nothing to offer, but just a waste of precious time. Before you would like to resume discussions with me, prove that I am a " Chandala " first. I will then prove that I am not, and we will then begun discussions on what you claim to know the best. regards/Bhaskar. , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > To All : > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya ji is now using less offensive language, hence I > am responding to his points (because he raised doubts about some > important issues) : > > (1) > He wrongly quotes me that I " cannot cite a single reference tosupport > his (my) Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha " . I gavehim the > name of the one of the most importantreferences which he did not want to > consult and says I cannot cite anyreference. As I said earlier, the very > purpose of my joining anyastrological forum was toshow concrete proofs > of both physical and non-physical astrology in acomparative manner. This > cannot be done in an hostile environmentbeing created by him. I do not > want to discuss thisdifficult topic with aperson who is not seriously > interested in it and is using bad languagefor me, but if other members > here are interested in these topics, theymay view some of my older > contributions to another forum : > http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58522 > http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58483 > http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=58486 > > I later added these ancient topics of mundane astrology to my own > website (cf.http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/sitemap ). I tried in vain > to discussthese things in AIA, mainly due to Chandrahari ji and Sunil > ji, whonever allowed me to discuss anything worthwhile. I thank > Chandrahari jifor forgetting me. > > (2) > Sunil ji's conjecture about " Surya rishi, who could also have > taughtMayasura " is merely a conjecture, supported by some modern > atheists. Ifsome people believe in Surya Deva as mentioned in original > texts, whySunil ji turns hostile ? > > 3) > I have myself worked on the date of Kalidasa. I also possess a verse > byKalidasa in which the great poet himself told his date, but > modernpublishers omit this last verse. If Sunil ji is really interested > ingenuine research, instead of abusing me, he should search for some > 19thcentury publication of Ritusamhaara (not publiushed by any > foreigner). > > 4) > Sunil ji falsely says that I " label any questioning as a personalattack > on (me) " . He is again resorting to a false and uncivil personalattack on > me by misreporting my discovery of 61-year cycle as 60-yearcycle. In > group discussion at IISc, some scientists had asked me aboutconnection > of 60-year Jovian cycle with my 61-year cycle, to which Ireplied that > Jovian cycle is of 60 Jovian years which are equal to 59.3solar years > and is therefore short by 1.7 years which is too much toignore. Hence, > 61-year cycle has no connection to Jovian cycle. In mypaper, I mentioned > that many researchers had earlier mentioned 60-yearcycle (I gave 9 > references) , but no one had ever mentioned a 61-yearcycle. Sunil ji > says " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter > meet at the same point " , but it is a wrong statement.In 60 Jovian years > equal 59.3 solar years, hence Sun and Jupiter do notcome to same point > after 59.3 solar or 60 Jovian years. Even aschoolboy can understand that > Jupiter has a period of 11.861 years,which amount to 59.3 years in 5 > revolutions). The shortfall of 1.7years is negligible for Sunil ji, but > it is over 20 raashis in fact. Howsuch a careless person could have > contributed anything worthwhile tothe world of knowledge is hard to > swallow. Yet he calls himself ascientist. Even if he carried some > research in his fruitful years, henow shows clear signs of aging. Sunil > ji ischarging me of plagiary, just because he fails to understand that > 59.3is different from 61. I request members to read my paper at : > http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting\ \ > ?t=anon > > In it, i referred to 60-year cycle with 9 references to earlier > works,none of which mentioned a 61-year cycle and none of them was > definiteabout any 60-year cycle as well, that is why it was called > quasi-60year cycle. Please look at Fig-8 in my paper titled " Annual > IndianRainfall : Long Term Trends " , in which I showed some trends > whichclearly indicate that we get more smooth trends as we go for > longerterms. But no scientist was sure whether this long term trend > should befixed at 60 ,65 or 85 years, there were varying conclusions in > earlier researches. I was thefirst person to change the arrangement of > dataset from year beginningwith January to year beginning with April, > after which a clear proof of61-year cycle was noticed by me as shown in > Fig-2 and same 61-year cycle was noticed by me inother global climatic > phenomena as well, like global pressure and temperature. I amsorry to > inform that Sunil ji is either careless or is deliberatelydistorting my > findings merely to malign me. My work hasno relation to Jupiter's cycle, > yet he falsely wants others to believethat I stole an old concept to > present a new theory. Then, he adds thatI " claim " to have presented my > paper. I never entered into any serviceanywhere, why CAOS, IISc would > have invited me had they not found somemerit in my work ? Sunil ji is > not an expert in this field but isdoubting not only my integrity but > also of CAOS, IISc by inferring thatIISc invited a plagiarist who > presented old theory in new form. > > In that paper, I provided concrete evidences of a 61-year cycle and > italso proved the existence of a climatic year beginning with April > whicha Japanese scientist Tetsuzo Yasunari had conjectured before me.In > the same paper, I presented my rain forecast which I had earliersent to > 615 weather scientists worldwide. Sunil ji gladly forgets tomention that > my rain forecasts were found to be " smart " and " good " byClimate branch > of NASA headquarters : > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s_Report%3B_%26_my_Paper_acc\ \ > epted_by_CAOS%2C_IISc > > Instead of showing any interest in learning how these forecasts > weremade, Sunil ji started maligning me, in cooperation with > Chandraharijiand his friend Sreenadhji who used words like " cheat,fool " > etc for me again and again. > > In my paper to IISc, I did not mention Suryasiddhanta, nor did Iexplain > the methodology behind my rain forecasts, as I clearly stated there that > " Only a brief outline of this concept can be presentedhere, because this > concept is too complex and vast to be presented in asingle paper. " > > Those who are real experts and are desirous of learning the > secretsbehind climatic teleconnections were pleased with my > contribution, butthose who wanted character assassination just because I > refused toaccepyt that wine is essential in Tantric Astrology could not > find anymerit in my work. Reason behind global climatic teleconnections > isunknown to modern science and scientists are eagerly awaiting any > reliable explanation. I concluded in that paper : " If we pay more > attention to a thorough examination ofraw data of relative rainfall in > order to find hidden patterns ofnature, a whole new world may be opened, > literally, because this newapproach is based upon the theory of two > universes . This second universe is not composed of visible matter but > influences the events of our universe profoundly .Surprisingly, rainfall > to rainfall correlation among various regionswithin a climatic zone is > much more strong and persistent thanpredictor-rainfall correlations , > and is fully operative even duringchaotic phases . " > > The last sentence " rainfall to rainfal correlation.... " provides a key > to this problem. It shows that predictor-rainfall relation is not a > cause-consequence relation as believed by a majority of weather > scientists. Currently, we are at the fag end of a " predictable phase " > which is to be followed by a prolonged chaotic phase in which > predictions based on physical predictors will fail to work, as they did > in previous chaotic phase. Only then materialists will be really > interested in non-physical explanation of physical events. Till then, > chaarvaakists may continue to attack and malign me. > > Sunil ji's points 5) and 6) are not fit to be answered. He says he is > not a veteran in astrology. Then, why he destroys discussions on > astrological topics ? If he is a veteral in envirinmental science, as he > claims, why he fails to understand school level concepts (eg, difference > between 59.3 and 61) ? > > 7) > Sunil ji says Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals ; > but he is mistaken. Chandrahariji published his works on Suryasiddhanta > in journals which did not have a single expert of Suryasiddhanta in its > panel , that is why Chandrahariji was able to cheat the panel and put > forth his imaninary concepts as being based on Suryasiddhanta. If a > peer-reviewed journal of nuclear physics publishes a paper on bio-gas, I > will not accept the authenticity of such a journal or such a paper. On > the other hand, my paper was accepted at IISc after review by referrees > whose initial report was sent to me in which some valuable suggestions > were made to improve the presentation of my paper. These referees were > experts in weather science, they knew the worth of my work, which > Sunilji is projecting as a worthless piece of plagiary perhaps due to > his ignorance. > > 8) > Like his earlier remarks, Sunilji is again showing signs of failing > memory and false citations. He says " the physicians and the temple > priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. " Like Kaulji, > Sunilji also misinterprets Manusmriti. Manu, like Vyaasa ji in MBh, > clearly says that only those persons should be regarded as Chaandaalas > who make a living out of Vedic Yajna, poojaa in temples, chikitsaa, and > astrology. Only distressed persons go to these four places, and ancient > sages regarded it sinful to extort money from distressed persons. > > Sunilji says he made contribution in science. Whatever be the worth of > his earlier works in science which I do not know, his present writings > lead me to believe that he is utterly incapable of genuine research : I > am saying so with an apology, but I must state the truth. A person > saying " the 60-year Jupiter cycle (when the Sun, the Moonand the Jupiter > meet at the same point " must have a knowledge of science and mathematics > comparable perhaps to a 7 or 8-year boy who knows there is a difference > of over 610 degrees or over 20 raashis between 61 solar years and 59.305 > solar years (=60 Jovian years) and yet claims Sun and Jupiter " meet at > the same point " after 60 years ! > > Sunil ji should forget what I am. Personal remarks about me like " a > great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be " are not conducive to a > healthy discussion on any topic. If Sunilji wants good discussion, he > must refrain from making personal attacks. I could have ignored his > messages had it not contained false and foolish remarks about monsoon > cycles and some other important things. > > He thinks publishers of Chandrahariji's articles are peers and those who > accept my papers are fools. This partisan attitude is not going to help > him in gaining any knowledge of traditional disciplines (which he does > not want to learn, otherwise he would have refrained from personal > attacks). I ask Sunilji to name a single " peer " among publishers of > Chandrahariji's articles who know how to compute Suryasiddhantic true > planets. These peers cannot go beyond Burgess, who made a mockery of > Suryasiddhanta. I had informed Sunilji that I had filed a lawsuit > against a head of jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University of being ignorant > of traditional astronomy, and I won that case (cf. > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/Credentials ) : that HOD was later > removed. Instead of trying to learn traditional astronomy, Sunilji > continued poking fun at me. It is due to his offensive language that I > withheld this knowledge from him. He is convinced about my > worthlessness, and I am also convinced about his unwillingness. Can we > not forget each other and attend to nobler tasks ?? > > If he continues his offensive, he will receive sound answers. I can > forget personal insults as long as it does does not harm my cause, as I > did in AIA when Chandrahariji abused me for weeks without a single bad > word from me, but I cannot tolerate any baseless offensive against the > cause for which I care. > > I am sorry to inform that the 61-year climatic cycle was convincingly > presented by me and was accepted by weather experts without any > refutation, but if Sunilji thinks it is a bogus work, why he does not > refute my article logically instead of spreding false rumours about it > ?? There is no physical explanation behind this 61-year cycle > (explanation lies in non-physical phenomena which I never explained), > but Sunilji is doubting the very existence of this cycle !! Even if I do > not explain it, the cycle exists and it was not known before pointed it > out. Sunilji should not confuse it with 60-year Jovian cycle. The > 60-year Jovian cycle has never been proven to be true by any weather > scientist (please do not change my words : I am not doubting its > existence, I am merely stating that weather scientists have not attested > it so far). Sunilji is denying facts, how can he learn explanations of > those facts ??? > > -VJ > ================== ================== ================== > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > sunil_bhattacharjya@ wrote: > > > > Dear all. > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > In all these Vinayji had conveyed to us that he cannot cite a single > > reference to support his Saurpaksha and Drikpasha systems of Jyotisha. > > I shall not insist on that hereafter. > > > > 2) > > > > Vinayji has overlooked my earlier mail where I said that like a yogi > > has a physical body but can move about in his astral body so also > > though the Sun has the physical body he can have another body to move > > away from his physical body. That is how Surya might have come to > Kunti > > or to Mayasura. We know that Kashyapa rishi also had a son called > > Vivasvan (Vivasvat). There was also another Surya rishi, who could > also > > have taught Mayasura. > > > > 3) > > > > Vinayji had not read my paper carefully and that is why he is telling > > that I was speculating on the date of Kalidasa. He had not seen how > the > > date of Kalidasa wasarrived at. If he did not agree then he could have > > frankly told me like I tell him when I do not ahgree with him. If he > > knows the date of Kalidasa correctly why does he not tell the group > > about it with proof. > > > > 4) > > > > In the AIA group Vinayji was boasting about his paper on 60-year cycle > > of rain, which he claims to have presented in I.I.Sc. and he wanted to > > give an interpretation reportedly based on Suryasiddhanta without > > establishing any proper connection with Suryasiddhanta and no > > appropriate verse from Suryasiddhanta was quoted there. Mind that > > Vinayji's paper was only a presentation and there is already a paper > > on that topic by the scientists Rajesh Agnihotri and Koushik Dutta, > > published in a peer-riviewed Journal (Current Science, Vol.85, No.4, > 25 > > August,2003), where the authors were saying about the 60-year > > periodicity of Indian Monsoon. I told him that the 60-year Jupiter > > cycle (when the Sun, the Moon and the Jupiter meet at the same point) > > could be the main reason for this periodicity. In fact any astrologer > > worth his salt may know about this cycle and even the Saturn comes to > > its earlier position in 60-years after completing two 30-year cycles. > > But Vinayji got afrronted. He should have explained to us in what way > > his paper is different from the earlier works and the 60-year Jupiter > > cycle but instead of that he flew in rage at our questioning the > > newness in his work. He wants everybody to accept his claims as > divine > > truth and without questioning. He labels any questioning as a personal > > attack on him. > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > Vinayji says > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > You got the fact of eastward flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you > > will use it in your essays, without acknowledging me for being the > > source of this information, and instead have already started abusing > me after getting this information. > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > Let him quote what exactly I wrote in the AIA forum in my first mails > > in response to his claim that eastward-flowing Saraswati started > > flowing to the west and that will show him that his own memory is > > playing tricks with him. > > > > 6) > > > > He says I have not discussed astrology but I do so with others. Others > > do not claim secret knowledge which cannot be divulged like Vinayji > > does. He says only a tapasvi can have the secret knowledge (and by > this > > he implies that he is a tapasvi and therefore what he says must be > > accepted unquestioningly) and I regret to have to express my inability > > to discuss astrology with such a person claimihg to be sitting on a > > vast storehose of ancient secret knowledge. If he comes down to the > > normal human-level of sharing knowledge I should have no hesitation to > > discuss astrology with him. However I must admit that am not a veteran > > in astrology and I am just collecting pebbles on the shore. > > > > 7) > > > > Vinayji compares his contribution with that of Chandrahariji. Not that > > I agree with everything that Chandrahariji says but I appreciate that > > Chandrahariji published papers in peer-reviewed journals against > > Vinayji's papers, which were either just presented in conferences or > > given in his own websites. > > > > 8) > > > > Vinayji questioned as to what I contributed in astrology. I want to > > assure Vinayji that I am still learning astrology and I do ask > > questions like a student who wants to understand a subject and do not > > claim to have mastered the subject. But I believe that I have right to > > question anything what appears to me as mistranslation and > > misinterpretation. I questioned Kaulji because he said that we cannot > > call Indian astrology as Vedic astrology and that the Indians learnt > > astrology from the Greeks and that Varahamihira had copied everything > > from Sphridhvaj and Kaulji had called Varahamihira a charlatan. As a > > student of Indian jyotisha I cannot tolerate that. He misinterpreted a > > verse to interpret that Varahamihira accepted the superior knowledge > of > > the Geeks in astrology for which they command respect but actually > that > > verse meant just the reverse. Kaulji said that the astrologers are > > Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession > > is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the > > ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned > that > > astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and > > Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the > > temple priest are also not to be invited for these ceremonies. Kaulji > > did not know the proper dates of Vedanga jyotisha and I only protested > > against that and told him what those dates should be. I am protesting > > against such harms being done to astrology and Hindu civilization. > > There are several such issues where I contested his knowledge. He may > > know astrology but he must accept the human limitations in > > interpreting the effects of the stars and not just condemn Hindu > > astrology citing examples where the fake astrologers have failed. A > > genuine astrologer tells his clients that the predictions are from his > > past karmaphal and that his present karma is in his hand and that > > present karma will have effect too. Hindu astrology is not fatalistic > > but constructive. If something bad is likely to happen one can work > > towards changing that. The basic purpose of Hindu astrology is to > > change that if any bad thing is like to happen through some > > counter-balancing good karma. Parashara and other greats had that > > approach. Thus a good astrologer tries to make the predictions fail if > > necessary and this failure is in fact a triumph of astrology. But > > people like Kaulji does not have the insight to understand that. I > have > > devoted sometime to protest what Kaulji is saying lest he misguides > > some of my gullible brothers and sisters by misinterpreting the > > efficacy and the purpose of astrology. Kaulji should channelise his > > energies properly and he must have respect for Hindu astrology. > Jyotish > > shastra contains both astronomy and astrology. So he cannot go on > > condemning Hindu astrology and then go to rectify Hindu calendar. I > > think that the past greats like Parashara had done tremendous work in > > astrology and if we master those what they said would be enough at > > least for people at ordinary level in which I am there as I do not > > claim to be a great tapasvi like Vinayji thinks himself to be. > > > > > > > > Finally Vinayji may be a veteran in astrology and may have his > admirers as he > > very often quotes the names of many professors to prove that. I am > just > > a beginner in astrology and I cannot compare myself with Vinayji. I am > > not claiming any superiority over Vinayji in astrology and I cannot > assert that > > myself as it is upto the others to say if I had made any contribution > > so far and it is also upto them to judge where I stand vis-a-vis > > Vinayji, if they have the time and desire to make any such comparison. > > I am just putting forth my views as they have given me an opportunity > > to do so, for which I am thankful to them. > > > > However I wish to ask Vinayji as to how can he say that I have not > made any contribution in Science and Technology when I published a > number of papers in peer-reviewed National and International Scientific > and Technical journals of repute and presented a number of papers in > big Scientific and Technical seminars and also have a number of patents > to my credit. Mr. Vinayji with this sort of statement are you fulfilling > your self-claimed vow that you would never lie? > > > > > > > > Regards nevertheless, > > > > > > Sunil. Bhattacharjya. > > > > --- On Sun, 4/5/09, vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ wrote: > > > > vinayjhaa16 vinayjhaa16@ > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009, 8:12 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To ALL : > > > > > > > > Since this thread may be read by other sincere members, I must add > here > > > > that the very purpose of my joining any astrological forum was to show > > > > concrete proofs of both physical and non-physical astrology in a > > > > comparative manner. This cannot be done in an hostile environment > > > > deliberately being created by a person (Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya) who > has > > > > made no contribution to either science or to astrology (although he > > > > writes on other topics, often good pieces) and is attacking me just > out > > > > of misunderstanding, to put it mildly. I was surprised that my paper > " A > > > > New Approach to Rain Forecasting " > > > > (http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ > to+Rain+Forecast in\ > > > > g) which was accepted by leading scientific institution of India made > > > > him believe that I was a cheat ! Why he did not inform IISc > (Bangalore) > > > > that I was a cheat ? > > > > > > > > To Sunil ji : > > > > > > > > You will get astrology from me if you talk astrology (which you never > > > > did), but rebuffs if you talk nonsense and level false charges on me. > > > > > > > > Your uncivil words about me from my days in AIA upto your recent mail > > > > convinces me that you have no desire to learn either decency or other > > > > things you do not already know. I know your personal details and some > of > > > > your works. I do not like your manner of making unfounded assertions > > > > without providing reliable evidences. How one can write " the great > poet > > > > Kalidasa of the 8th century BCE in his drama Vikramorvashia " , without > > > > providing some reason of " 8th century BCE " dating ( cf. 'The dotted > > > > record and its effect on the Ancient Indian chronology, including the > > > > antiquity of the Veda and the Bhagavad Gita') !! One has a right to > make > > > > discoveries, but not without providing reasons. If such a person asks > me > > > > to provide proofs of my statements about topics which are beyond his > > > > field of interest, I can only be amused. > > > > > > > > Read my previous mails in which I have mentioned some of the older > > > > sources of Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. Or ask some professor of any > > > > Sanskrit university teaching the syllabus of Jyotishaachaarya, they > will > > > > enlighten you. You will never understand difficult texts like > > > > Siddhaantatattvaviv eka of Kamlaakara Bhatta. The last verse of > > > > Suryasiddhanta says it is " rahasyam brahma-sammitam " . Physical > planets > > > > are not rahasyam brahma-sammitam , they are perceived by sages and > > > > lechers alike. In the beginning of Suryasiddhanta, it is said that > Lord > > > > Surya disappeared after talking to Mayaasura. Can the physical Sun do > so > > > > ?? If Suryasiddhanta is telling false and unscientific stories, why > > > > blame me for it ? Go and fight with Lord Surya for His false > statements. > > > > Mayaasura had to undergo rigorous tapasyaa for seeing Lord Surya, and > > > > there is no mention of two or even one tola of wine as a part of such > a > > > > tapasyaa. Only a tapasvi can see Saurpaksha. Others may see only its > > > > results. > > > > > > > > With other members, I have seen you discussing astrology, but with me, > > > > you are under an oath never to discuss astrology and deliberately want > > > > to get things out of me by abusing me. Now you are falsely calling me > a > > > > liar. I did not call you a liar. You had challended that I lied about > > > > Saptasindhu flowing eastward, and when I reluctantly showed you the > > > > proof, you started abusing me for " misinterpretation " . What I > > > > misinterpreted ? I provided merely an exact literal translation of the > > > > verse and gave no interpretation at all. You got the fact of eastward > > > > flow of Saptasindhu from me, and now you will use it in your essays, > > > > without acknowledging me for being the source of this information, and > > > > instead have already started abusing me after getting this > information. > > > > This is a sign of your worthiness. I do not know your contribution to > > > > science, although you declare " I am a scientist " ! Having a degree and > > > > makes one a scientist ? My scientific papers accepted by world > renowned > > > > institutions made me a liar and a cheat in your eyes !! Have you ever > > > > produced any scientific paper accepted by world class institutions ? > > > > > > > > In AIA, Mr Chandrahari was calling me a " cheat " and " unscientific " > again > > > > and again, hence I was forced to show my scientific as well as > > > > astrological credentials ( > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ > %26_my_Paper_ acc\ > > > > epted_by_CAOS% 2C_IISc > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Credentials > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ Vinay_Jha > > > > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ > to+Rain+Forecast ing\ > > > > ?t=anon) , after which you started casting doubts over acceptance of > my > > > > paper by CAOS, IISc. > > > > > > > > Instead of asking IISc and other institutions about the genuineness of > > > > evidences I showed, you started expressing unfounded doubts about my > > > > veracity and started attacking me. > > > > > > > > Instead of levelling baseless charges against me after viewing my > works, > > > > you should have asked me to show those weather forecasts which were > > > > approved by NASA and other institutions, and should have asked me to > > > > explain the methods behind those forecasts. I really wanted to discuss > > > > the methods and wanted to show proofs. But you discussed my supposedly > > > > fake letters and false statements without proving that I was producing > > > > fake papers. It shows how genuinely you are concerned about truth and > it > > > > also show how intolerant you are towards the achievements of someone. > > > > Instead of trying to understand the methods, you started attacking me > > > > personally. When I started a new thread in AIA named 'Tantric > > > > Astrology' to explain the ancient methods of Yaamala Tantra used in > > > > mundane astrology, you deliberately diverted the discussion to the > > > > benefits of wine, knowing well that a person avowed to lifelong > > > > brahmacharya would be forced to leave such discussions. You were never > > > > serious in any astrological discussion ; astrology is not your field ; > I > > > > wonder why you join astrological forums ! I left AIA due to wastage of > > > > my time over false accusations and abuses from you and your friends. > Now > > > > you want the same in this forum. Instead of discussing astrological > > > > topics, you want to discuss my character without providing any proof > of > > > > what I cheated or where I lied. The fact is opposite : you say two > tolas > > > > of wine maked a man divine, and I believe in the opposite : I subsist > on > > > > one meal a day, having forsaken salt, spices, oils & c in foods, > besides > > > > performing a lot of other things to purify myself. Why my way of life > > > > gives so much pain to you that you spend hours writing nonsense to me > ?? > > > > Do some soul searching and devote your time to " (1) Ancient Indian > > > > Chronology, (2) Finding the Original Shastu Tantra, (3) finding the > > > > Original bhagavad Gita " , which you once declared to be your fields of > > > > interest. > > > > > > > > Your language is getting from bad to worse. I promised I am not going > to > > > > tolerate your misbehaviour, because I am convinced you are avowed to > > > > disrupt any genuine ASTROLOGICAL topic I may ever discuss. I told you > > > > again and again that you must discuss astrology here, and not the > > > > benefits of wine & c or level personal attacks needlessly. I did not > want > > > > to discuss anything with you, because your real intention was > disruption > > > > of all astrological discussion and to harass me so that I leave all > > > > forums. > > > > > > > > Do not try to quote me falsely or out of context. I have 6749 mails in > > > > my store to show your falsehood, why you are threatening me of show my > > > > supposedly false views on Saptasindhu. I am under an oath never to > lie, > > > > and I did not marry or go into any service because I did not want to > be > > > > compelled by circumstances to lie ever in my life. I know neither my > > > > words nor concrete evidences will never convince you, because you have > > > > an incurable negative attitude towards me due to my way of life. > > > > > > > > Astrology is the mother of modern science, but astrology has been > > > > degraded. It is your disbelief in astrology that even good uses of it > > > > are doubted by you. By insulting or attacking me , you will never get > > > > anyhing worthwhile out of me, even if I give it to you, because the > real > > > > giver of knowledge is Lord Surya Whose existence you refuse to > > > > acknowledge. > > > > > > > > Please calm down and some to senses. There are murderers, rapists, > > > > dacoits in the world. Why all your anger is focussed on me ?? Search > > > > your own soul. You will find all three sets of Saptasindhus within > your > > > > own Self. Try to understand the original meaning of the word " nadi " > > > > ('river' is a Laukika meaning, find out the original Vedic meaning > from > > > > the root). > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > ============ ========= = ============ ======= > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > Just give one reference from ancient scriptures to prove about your > > > > Saurapaksha and drikpaksha. I trust the scriptures more than your > > > > imaginary outpourings. > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > Do you want me to send the copies of my mails and your mails to the > > > > group to show who was lying on the Saptasindhu issue? > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha vinayjhaa16@ ... > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009, 7:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunilji, > > > > > > > > > > You do not know how difficult it is for me to control my words while > I > > > > answer your mails. Now I must conclude your sole mission is to disrupt > > > > astrological discussions. There are good articles on Sarasvati in > > > > internet where you can contribute ; this topic has no relation to > > > > astrology. You are lying that you found the verse yourself , I sent > the > > > > verse to you. Moreover, I never misinterpreted the verse, I gave the > > > > literal translation while you believe your fancuful meanings to be the > > > > real translation. there is no mention of stormy conditions in that > > > > verse. literal translation and interpretation are different things. > The > > > > point I made was that Saptasindhu was in the heartland of Aryavarta as > > > > mentioned by Vyaasaji, but you buried that point under a false > argument > > > > over your stormy conditions merely to poke fun at my supposedly wrong > > > > interpretation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your next point about Hartley and Burgess is a mere proof of your > > > > ignorance of Suryasiddhanta and of your blind faith on western > > > > commentators, as well as of your habit of producing false arguments > with > > > > a view to prove false things. Suryasiddhantic true Sun and true Moon > > > > have great difference with Sun and Moon of physical astronomy, but > > > > Suryasiddhantic tithi has negligible difference with that of physical > > > > astronomy, because tithi is relative difference between Sun and Moon. > > > > Suryasiddhantic synodical lunar month is equal to 29.530587947 days, > > > > which is very near to modern value. Eclipses are related to synodical > > > > period, ie, to relative position of Sun and Moon. Hence Hartley found > no > > > > much difference between timings of Suryasiddhantic eclipses and > physical > > > > eclipses. i have used the term " no much difference " while you use > therm > > > > " accurately " which is a lie. But even if eclipses have no much > > > > difference, absolute position of true Sun or true Moon have great > > > > > > > > > > differences, esp when we go into past. This difference increases at > > > > the rate of 360 degrees in 42000 years. Another source of difference > is > > > > nearly 1.5 degrees of difference in mandaphal of Suryasiddhantic Moon > > > > and physical (Drikpakshiya) Moon. Third source is difference between > the > > > > length of Suryasiddhantic solar year and Drikpakshiya year (sidereal ; > > > > tropical year has less difference). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can live in your imaginary world of Maayaa believing in physical > > > > and sensory things. It is not my duty to enlighten you. That is why I > > > > always tried to hold information, and simply answered your false and > > > > motivated charges on me. If Vyaasaji talks about eclipses, you > conclude > > > > he must talk about Drikpakshiya and not about Sauarpakshiya eclipses > and > > > > do noy feel any need to substantiate that physical reality is the > > > > ultimate reality. Gita says that persons believing merely in the > > > > physical are destined to hell. If Lord Krishna could not save such > > > > persons, how can I ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, you will now receive tit-for-tat replies for your foolish > > > > mails. I will give information, proofs & c only when you come to > believe > > > > that astrological concepts must be proven astrologically and not > > > > physically. although I do not deem you fit for astrologiccal > discussion, > > > > I am giving you an instance of what is astrological proof. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Make national horoscopes at the time of nirayana mesha samktaantis > on > > > > the basis of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya computations, and compare > > > > the phalita results of both horoscopes along the principles of > > > > Paraashara. You will find that Saurapakshiya predictions conform to > > > > actual events perfectly, while Drikpakshiya predictions bear no such > > > > relation to reality in an overwhelming majority of cases. I wasted > > > > decades on mutual comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya > > > > horoscopes in mundane and individual horoscopy, but you dismiss > > > > Saurapaksha without any astrological investigation. You have no > interest > > > > in astrological investigation of astrological entities. Suryasiddhanta > > > > is an astrological treatise which has no relation to physical > astronomy, > > > > which can be proven from the text itself, but it is better to > undertake > > > > an unbiased comparison of Drikpakshiya and Saurapakshiya horoscopes to > > > > arrive at any conclusive finding. But you are too biased to be > > > > interested > > > > > > > > > > in any astrological investigation and are adamant on wasting my > > > > precious time. If you agree to test Suryasiddhanta " ASTROLOGICALLY " , > I > > > > will retract all my statements against you and will apologize for > using > > > > harsh words, but if you are intent upon disrupting astrological > > > > discussion with non-astrological BAKAWAAS, I will use harsher words > for > > > > you in future, because an astrological forum should have no place for > > > > non-astrological nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > Sunday, April 5, 2009 2:50:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you forget things. In AIA you wrote that Saraswati moved > from > > > > east to west. Then I told you that at Paunta saheb one stream of > > > > Saraswati goes to meet Yamuna and it then moves eastward and that is > how > > > > it is said that there is Triveni Sangam at Prayag. The other stream of > > > > Saraswati went westward to be one of the seven rivers (Saptasindhu) .. > > > > When I asked you the reference as to where you found that Saraswati > > > > changed direction fron east to west you did not give and stated that > you > > > > have no time. Later on you sent me a mail personally saying that you > are > > > > going to write an article and even though the Mahabharata is in front > of > > > > you, you will not give me the reference. Then I found the verse in the > > > > Mahabharata and sent you the verse and told you how you mistranslated > it > > > > . That day when Lord Krishna was going to Hastinapur it was so stormy > > > > that the eastward moving Saptasindhu (mind that Saraswati is not > sataed > > > > here) appeared to move in the reverse > > > > > > > > > > direction. I have only told you that the Vedas have mentioned more > > > > than one Saptasindhu. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I told you that Hartley could find out the date and time of the > > > > eclipses accurately from the Suryasiddhanta as edited by Burgess you > > > > just ignored that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no objection if you live with your imaginations as you have > not > > > > given any reference so far to substantiate what you say. Vedavyasa > > > > talked about the eclipses and their effects also and I am sure that he > > > > referred to the physical phenomena and these did not occur in your > > > > imaginary locations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe you are a sincere person, that is why I am answering your > > > > mails. But you are blindly following the teachings of western > > > > commentators who distorted traditional jyotisha. What you call " my > > > > imaginary " Saurpaksha is not my invention ; the concept of two Suns > and > > > > two Moons was present in Vedic and anti-Vedic variants of Indian > > > > astrology from prehistoric times, and has continued to modern times. > But > > > > with the progress of materialism, the case of Saurpaksha has weakened > > > > and a majority of persons do not want to get it discussed. I have no > > > > intention to persuade them, it is futile. If you do not believe in > > > > Saurpaksha, please keep away from me. Phalita Jyotisha is the only > proof > > > > of Saurpaksha, because Saurpakshiya planets cannot be directly > > > > perceived, but you never wanted to " test " my assertions through > > > > practical analyses of horoscopes made along Drik and Saur methods, > which > > > > is the only proper way to decide the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I already said that my computational ability is based upon mastery > of > > > > mathematical tables like log and antilog tables, which is not a > magical > > > > or tantric feat. why are you angry at me if I committed the crime of > > > > learning these tables by rote in my school days ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are wrong in asserting : " Your imagination about the separate > > > > locations of the physical planets and the presiding deities of the > > > > planets has not been mentioned in any ancient text. " If you have not > > > > read ancient texts, it is not my fault. You called me a liar about > > > > eastward flowing Saptasindhu, and I did not try to give you the verse > > > > because I wanted you to search that verse through the hint I provided. > > > > But did not " waste " you time over my false claims. And when I provided > > > > the verse, you did not beg an apology for you uncivil remarks against > > > > me. Read your mails : have you ever used such a language for any other > > > > person in youtr life ? I used to read your messages to others in AIA > and > > > > was surprided with the difference. You have singled me out for > ridicule. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The very concept of presiding deity of a planet is your inventiomn. > It > > > > is supported neither by modern science nor by any astrological texts > of > > > > repute. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did > > > > not give any reference to back your statement. " Instead, you should > > > > provide a reference to back your wrong belief of ayanamsha being a > > > > concept of physical astronomy. Modern physical astronomy has a concept > > > > of precession of equinoxes, which was known to ancients. But they > never > > > > called it ayanamsha. What they called ayanamsha was known as > trapidation > > > > or libration, which is not a phenomenon of the physical world and was > > > > therefore rejected by astronomers after Copernicus. Till then, the > > > > socalled discovery of Hipparchus was rotting on papyrus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you refrain from false charges on me and really want proofs, I > can > > > > show you. But hitherto you have only wasted my time. For the last > time, > > > > I request you to test astrological concepts astrologically, or stop > > > > sending messages to me. I still believe you are a sincere person, as I > > > > gather from your messages to others. It is only me who has a special > > > > treatment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you forget the past and stop referring to what you said or what I > > > > said, things can get alright and you may be able to test the proofs I > am > > > > ready to provide. But if your intention is merely to waste my time > over > > > > personal feuds so that I leave all forums, I will request you to > > > > behave like a gentleman and forget me for ever. If you think my views > > > > are my inventions which will die with me, you are mistaken. The best > > > > works on Saurpaksha have never been translated into any language but > > > > form a part of syllabus of Jyotisharya in Sanskrit unuiversities. It > is > > > > neither possible nor my duty to teach these obscure ancient texts here > > > > in forums. You should enrol in those universities where these > > > > texts are taught. But if you want verifiable proofs, I am willing to > > > > provide. But I am still sorry for your disbelief in my paper being > > > > accepted at CAOS, IISc. If I am a liar, how you will ever listen to > me. > > > > And without listening properly, how will ever know my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > views properly ? Hence, either stop all communication, or begin anew > > > > forgetting all past and talk on proofs only. Then I will be able to > give > > > > you proofs. But if you continue wasting my time over useless matters, > > > > including present message, who will write down the proofs you ask me > to > > > > supply ? I have many tasks at hand. I know you have a very low opinion > > > > of me. You forget that I tolerated direct abuses by Mr Chandrahari > till > > > > his last message to me. I tolerated him because I believed him to be > an > > > > honest intellectual. Sreenadh led me to believe so. Sreenadh requested > > > > him to discuss the matters with me amicably without abusing, but > failed. > > > > Sreenadh sent me works of Mr Chandrahari, so that I could discuss his > > > > ideas. After reading these works of Mr Chandrahari, i came to learn > that > > > > Mr Chandrahari was rendering a faulty interpretation of Suryasiddhanta > > > > and was propagating a false concept of ayanamsha in the name of > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Mr Chandrahari has every right > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to propound his views, but he has no right to falsely call his views > > > > Suryasiddhantic. Then I shot back at Mr Chandrahari, challenging him > for > > > > shaastraartha. As a result, Mr Chandrahari left the field and Sreenadh > > > > started abusing and attacking me. Is it shaastraartha ? Who avoided a > > > > free and fair debate ? Who vitiated thje environment ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I tried to avoid this unwanted controversy and started a new > > > > topic on tantric astrology, why a discussion on astrology was diverted > > > > to wine ? Did I start a discussion on the use of wine in astrology ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you really want proofs about foolproof methods of astrology, of > > > > existence of Saurpaksha, etc, you will have to read my articles on > > > > tantric astrology. But if you remove " astrology " and discuss only > > > > " tantra " , then I have no time for you. You do not know what you are > > > > missing, because you have consistently refused to listen, by diverting > > > > the issues. In future, please read my messages twice before answering. > > > > There is no hurry. Do not answer in haste. I do not know you future, > but > > > > I am going to live here for 35 years more. Forget that I am a > > > > brahmachaari, if you can check you references to wine. If you again > > > > start discussing the benefits of wine, I will have to say that it is > > > > sinful for me to listen to such talks. It is an astrological forum and > > > > there is no use of discussing wine in these forums. I am not > belittling > > > > you, I am merely stating my limitations. I belonged to a rich and > > > > powerful family, and topped in science and later in English literature > , > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > renounced worldly things for the sake of my salvation. I cannot > > > > tolerate things which are banned for a lifelong brahmachaari. If you > > > > want any discussion at all, you will have to remember my conditions. > It > > > > is my last non-astrological message to you. Either talk astrology, or > > > > stop talking to me. I have no time for other things, esp personal > feuds, > > > > in these forums. Presently you are in a fighting mood. Hence, please > > > > rest for a few days and when your mood calms down, start discussing > > > > astrology, if you want. I have forgiven even obscene abuses (not from > > > > you) to me in . But if think you never used foul words for me, I > am > > > > forgiving you for the last time. I will not forgive any attempt to > > > > divert the discussion to non-astrological issues, even if you eulogize > > > > me. I care neither for abuses nor for praises. If you think you abused > > > > me or I abused you, please forget the past and start anew. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You main problem is that you want discussions with a software > > > > developer without touching his software, due to your prejudices about > > > > Suryasiddhanta. Ignorance can be cured (you are not ignorant), but > there > > > > is no cure for prejudice (you are really prejudiced, I am not abusing > > > > you, I really believe so). Forget subjective matters, and come to > > > > astrology objectively, and test objective proofs which I tried in vain > > > > to show under the title tantric astrology. Can I discuss that topic > > > > again, here ? But remember, I will not discuss ALL tantric astrology, > > > > because it is a vast ocean and I have access only to a part of it. i > am > > > > not omniscient. I will discuss only those things which I know well and > > > > can substantiate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good Wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ========= ==== ============ ========= ========= > ========= > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Saturday, April 4, 2009 1:53:11 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in Vishakha can > > > > " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unquote > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that you know that the Jyotish shastra includes both > > > > astrology and physical astronomy and they are clubbed together as both > > > > are inter-related. Any astrologer worth his salt knows that Shani in > > > > Visakha can aspect Rohini. Vedavyasa did mention physical phenomena > when > > > > he said the Sun was in Visakha and when he said about the eclipses > > > > within 13 days etc. anot your imaginary Saurpaksha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that to prove your mathematical ability you will have to > > > > travel round the world like Shakuntala Devi does. Far from it. > > > > Shakuntala Devi does not tour the world to prove her ability. She gets > > > > invitation because of her mathemetical and other abilities. I said > that > > > > it will be better for you to prove it if you want others to believe > in > > > > what you say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was the first to tell you in the AIA forum that according to Manu > a > > > > married person can also become Brahmachari provided he restricts his > > > > physical intimaccies. That was in reply to your statement that you > have > > > > insight into Suryasiddhanta only because you are meeting the > > > > requirements such as remaining unmarried and being a life-long > > > > Brahmachari and that you take one meal a day and follow all the > required > > > > rules and that you do not sleep in the night etc. and you wanted all > to > > > > believe in these claims of yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your imagination about the separate locations of the physical > planets > > > > and the presiding deities of the planets has not been mentioned in any > > > > ancient text. Without any text reference from the shastras how do you > > > > want us to aacept it just because you think so or your guru has told > you > > > > so? The presiding deity of a planet can move like a yogi can move > > > > through his astral body but like the yogi cannot really abandon his > body > > > > until he leaves the body for good.so also the planet has a physical > > > > identity. One cannot separate the physical identity from the planet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding ayanamsha as a Saurpaksha concept also you did not give > any > > > > reference to back your statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You do not know the meaning of the phrase " good riddance " . When you > > > > said that you do not want to have anything with me then I said " good > > > > riddance " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are miscontruing whatever one says if that is not to your > liking. > > > > you think that you can go on claiming anything and nobody should > > > > question you. You say that to know whether some of your claims are > right > > > > or wrong one will have to go and meet the professors, who are known to > > > > you. You does not believe in independent proofs. When these professors > > > > depart from this world the proofs will go with them. You are under > wrong > > > > impression. Asking for proof is not character assassination. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wrote to you the last mail only to clarify as you dragged my name > in > > > > your mail to Bhaskarji and you made false allegations against me that > I > > > > have used foul words against you and that I raised the topic of wine > in > > > > Tantra etc. Do you think that the character assassination that you are > > > > doing and that your maligning of Tantra etc. should have gone > > > > unopposed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 4/3/09, vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vinayjhaa16 <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Friday, April 3, 2009, 1:26 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TO ALL : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya is in a fighting mood, and is trying to forge > an > > > > alliance with Mr Bhaskar against me (that is why he posted here, > > > > guessing I was fighting with Mr Bhaskar). The fact is I have no time > for > > > > useless bullfights. I do not want to waste my and others' time by > > > > starting a useless feud in forums. I believe his attitude cannot be > > > > changed, but I hope following passages recently sent by me to another > > > > user may be useful in making some important points clear : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <<<< " There are two branches of Vedic Astrology. One is Saurpaksha, > > > > other is Drikpaksha. These terms are unfamiliar to internet users, > > > > because traditional texts hitherto untranslated into any other > language > > > > dealt with these concepts, and Ketaki System is a sole exception in > > > > modern age which popularized these terms. Drikpaksha means the > material > > > > or physical world perceived by means of sense organs. In Kantian > > > > terminology, it is phenomenal world. Modern astronomy deals with this > > > > world. The other trend, Saurpaksha, dealt with the other higher world > of > > > > deities who cannot be seen directly by our sense organs. In Kantian > > > > words, it is noumenal world. Ancient Vedic astrology was totally based > > > > upon this noumenal world and had no connection with phenomenal world. > > > > Perhaps it was due to God's desire that materialists should be kept > away > > > > from this higher world that both worlds use similar names for planets. > > > > But Saurpakshiya planets have nothing in common with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drikpakshiya planets, excepting names. The latter is a physical dead > > > > thing which we see in the sky. The former is a god whose position is > > > > different and cannot be seen directly. Distance of Drikpakshiya Sun is > > > > 149.6 million Kms from us, while Saurpakshiya Sun is only 5.5 million > > > > Kms from us : a difference of over 27 times ! Drikpakshiya world > rotates > > > > once every 42000 years with respect to the fixed Saurpakshiya world. > In > > > > early 2000 AD, both worlds coincided, as far as mean positions of > > > > planets are concerned... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ayanamsha is purely a Saurpakshiya concept. Drikpakshiya world of > > > > modern astronomy does not show such a phenomenon. Modern astronomy has > > > > no equivalent for this term, and even English speakers use the > Sanskrit > > > > word " ayanamsha " . 19th century authors like Colebrooke started > imposing > > > > modern astronomy upon ancient Vedic concepts, which resulted into > > > > present day misconceptions about ayanamsha. Lahiri followed this > modern > > > > method and identified the star Spica with Vedic (Saurpakshiya) star > > > > Chitra because according to this logic ayanamsha was found to be zero > in > > > > 285 AD (you say 280 AD approximately) . It was therefore concluded > that > > > > both sidereal and tropical zodiacs separated around 285 AD. But the > > > > inherent weakness in this method is that Chitra is not the starting > > > > point of any zodiac, that point is beginning of Aries (FPA). There is > no > > > > visible star at sidereal or tropical FPA. This modern method is based > > > > upon a fallacious assumption that Drikpakshiya Tropical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means Saurpakshiya Saayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The concept of precession was known in ancient India with a high > > > > degree of precision ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ > > > > Ayanamsha+ vs+Precession ), but was never used in astrology. It had no > > > > connection with ayanamsha. The latter was related to Trepidation or > > > > libration of the equinoxes. In spite of knowledge of precession in the > > > > time of Hipparchus, Trepidation was used by almost all astrologers in > > > > Greece, Egypt, Arabia, India, etc, down to the time of Copernicus. It > > > > was only afrer renaissance that Trepidation was rejected by physical > > > > scientists and followers of material science imposed the concept of > > > > precession upon ayanamsha. Trepidation is a Saurpakshiya concept and > is > > > > not found to exist in the Drikpakshiya (material world). Similarly, > > > > precession is a non-Saurpakshiya concept of physical world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot observe the Saurpakshiya world directly. Then, what is the > > > > proof of its existence ? Material astronomy can neither prove nor > > > > disprove the existence or non-existence of non-material entities. > > > > Predictive astrology is the only proof. " >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya' s first charge on me is : >>>> " You say that > > > > the location of the physical planets are different from the actual > > > > locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with you. Will > you > > > > say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge which you claim to > > > > possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the Mahabharata war the > > > > Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical location) > > > > and that it was tormenting Rohini. " <<<< << > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did Vyaasa Jee say he was implying the " physical planet " ? > > > > Vyaasa jee has mentioned countless of times that grahas are deities, > and > > > > everyone knows deities can be perceived only when they want to make > > > > themselves visible. How physical astronomy can prove that a Shani in > > > > Vishakha can " torment " Rohini ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His second charge is that he wanted me to demonstrate my > computational > > > > ability. I had clearly said that I am not Ramanujam (or Shakuntala > > > > Devi), and my computational abilities are due to mastery of a lot of > > > > mathematical tables since early boyhood, like logarithmic and antilog > > > > tables. I had mentioned the name and departments of a university where > > > > my computational ability was checked. Instead of asking those > > > > professors, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya says " you cannot prove it and want a > > > > face-saving exit from the topic. " Why should I start touring the > globe > > > > like Shakuntala Devi, stopping my research works ? Mr Sunil > Bhattacharya > > > > is certainly not sincere and is after character assassination. If he > > > > really doubts me, he can come to my town ( I will bear his expenses in > > > > my town, but not travelling expenses) and test me. I believe he will > > > > decline this offer and find new excuses to malign me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is >>>> " your claim that one has to be a lifeong > > > > Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the ancient > > > > times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient Kumaras > and > > > > only a few others were balabrahmachari. " <<<< > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He does not know the difference between a Brahmachaari and a > > > > Baala-brahmachaari, although he uses both terms. Ancient sages were > > > > married and were Brahmachaaris at the same time. But married > > > > Brahmachaaris are not Baala-Brahmachaaris . Mr Sunil Bhattacharya > > > > quotes Mahabharata every now and then , but only in a distorted manner > > > > in order to prove his wrong points. In Mahabharata, when Ashwatthaamaa > > > > said he does not know how to retract a Brahmaastra, Lord Krishna said > > > > Ashwatthaamaa could not do so because he was not a Brahmachaari, while > > > > Arjuna could retract it because Arjuna was a Brahmachaari. > > > > Ashwatthaamaa was a celibate brahmin of a high lineage, and there is > no > > > > episode which can prove his fall from Brahmachaarya, excepting a brief > > > > reference to presence of dancers in his tent at Kuruksetra during war. > > > > Arjuna was known to have more than one wife and more than one > offspring, > > > > but rejected Urvashi's offer because in Urvashi's offer there Kaama > was > > > > merely a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > means of carnal pleasure which Arjuna had to reject, while Kaama > > > > according to Dharma, ie intended for saving the lineage, is Lord > > > > Himself as told in Gita. Arjuna was Gudaakesha, one who has attained > > > > Yoganidra by conquering normal sleep. He was a real tapasvi and a real > > > > sadhu. Hence he was a Brahmachaari. If Lord Krishna and Vyaasa Jee say > > > > so, why should I accept Mr Sunils' wrong definition of brahmacharya as > a > > > > mere state of remaining unmarried. A single instance of seminal > > > > ejaculation destroys brahmacharya. That is why bad company and > taamasika > > > > foods and drinks are forbidden for saatvika persons. Worls Health > > > > Organization was not founded for upholding brahmacharya and is free > to > > > > eulogize a few tolas of wine. But a single drop of wine is worse than > > > > cobra venom for a real brahmachaari. Many doctors prescribe wine , > meat, > > > > fish, eggs, but forget that Homo Sapiens was evolved out of a > > > > non-carnivorous family and unnatural food habits are giving rise to a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot of new diseases. I did not join forums to propagate > > > > brahmacharya, and Sunil ji is free to follow his ideas, but he should > > > > not distort ancient terms to suit his personal habits. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His next point is that I was falsely complaining of being abused by > > > > him. He never used obscene words for me or for anyone. But as far as I > > > > know, I am the only person who became a target of his false and often > > > > abusive (not obscene) remarks. Even his present mail contains words > like > > > > " dirty tactics " , " you cannot prove it and want a face-saving exit > from > > > > the topic " , " bullshit " , 'unprovable tall claims " , " left > > > > ignominiously " which cannot be said to be conducive for a healthy > > > > discussion. His most provocative and abusive words are his > deliberately > > > > false statements : (1)that Chandrahariji did use strong words in the > > > > beginning only (actually, Chandrahariji stopped correspondence when he > > > > leant that my works were recognized by some leading scientific > > > > institutions, and then Mr Sreenadh and Mr Sunil Bhattacharya were > hired > > > > by Chandrahariji to spread rumours that I never delivered anything > at > > > > Indian Institute of Science ( cf. http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > com/page/ NASA%27s_ Report%3B_ %26_my_Paper_ accepted_ by_CAOS%2C_ > > > > IISc ). Mr Sunil Bhattacharya even poked fun at my scientific paper > > > > which was accepted by CAOS, IISc. I asked these fellows to contact > CAOS, > > > > IISc whether I was a liar or not, but they had an agenda to malign me. > > > > He falsely says " in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words > in > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall > claims. " > > > > These " strong words " were fit for a libel suit , and Chandrahariji > used > > > > such words even in his last mails concerning me, not only in his > initial > > > > mail. I am pained to note that in spite of my tolerance of > > > > Chandrahariji' s abuses, he and a handful of his followers never > thought > > > > that I am a tolerant person, and intesified their offensive against > me, > > > > denying any chance of free and fair discussion. When I recognized that > > > > Chandrahariji is a dishonest person and wants to literally crush me > just > > > > because I know the practical methods of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suryasiddhantic computations which he wrongly interprets and falsely > > > > projects himself as an expert of Suryasiddhanta, I started refuting > him, > > > > and challenged him for an intellectual debate, after which he left the > > > > field and his followers started abusing me, some of them even sent me > > > > obscene messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " In your every mail you used > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you. " > > > > Chandrahariji abused me till his last mail, and in every reply I > > > > requested him to calm down and discuss, but in vain. Mr Sreenadh and > Mr > > > > Bhaskar once tried to request Chandrahariji to discuss the matter > calmly > > > > instead of abusing. But they failed. When I asked Chandrahariji for a > > > > shaastraartha, his followers were mad with anger and started abusing > me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya falsely says : " Sreenadhji, the owners and > the > > > > moderators were very tolerant towards you. " Sreenadhji was really > good > > > > in the beginning, but when Chandrahariji brought the issue to a point > of > > > > no return, I started challenging his ideas and invited him for a > > > > shaastraartha, Chandrahariji went into hibernation and Sreenadhji > > > > launched a venomous attack upon me, in AIA, in private emails, and in > > > > Allahabad Conference where I was instrumental in allowing him a chance > > > > to speak ( there too he abused and left the spot, without hearing the > > > > answers). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Sunil Bhattacharya deliberately forgets these facts and is > > > > misreporting here just to create a hostile environment against me. Had > > > > he behaved like a gentleman and refrained from impolite words, why I > > > > should have denied him the access to my Hindi book, whose English > > > > summary still can be read at three websites, one is Australian, > another > > > > is Wikipedia (history tab), and the third is mine . I removed my book > > > > from the jyotirvidya site because the revised version could not be > > > > uploaded there due to size and had to be uploaded on another site. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A lot of people in the world today are under a hallucination that > > > > material world is everything and ancient sages had no knowledge which > > > > modern science has not discovered. Their refusal to discuss and test > > > > springs from this materialist belief. Among these materialists, only > > > > those may be able to fairly judge the truth about astrology who keep > > > > away from wine, women and selling of astrology. I have not set these > > > > rules, these are ancient guidelines which moderners want to deny. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was glad when Mr Sunil Bhattacharya said that he wants to get rid > of > > > > me. Why he has again decidedd to waste my and others' time must have > > > > some cause. That cause is a desire to crush the traditional astrology > as > > > > based on Suryasiddhanta. Although all internet users are users of > > > > softwares based on physical astronomy, the wish to kill > Suryasiddhantic > > > > astrology is a wishful thinking, majority of Indians stil use and will > > > > continue to use panchangas and kundalis based on crude or refined > tables > > > > originally derived from Suryasiddhanta. The refusal to test the > > > > astrological validity of Suryasiddhanta is wrongly projected as > > > > " scientific " spirit by these enthusiasts. Scientific method does not > > > > reject a thing before testing it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am abstaining from using bad words about Mr Sunil Bhattacharya. I > > > > left AIA because my time was wasted over refutals of false charges and > > > > abuses by these persons, who are now after me in other forums. If I am > a > > > > bad guy, why he does not forget me ? Has he no noble task at hand ? I > > > > have no cure for prejudice. Some people suppose anyone finding > something > > > > useful in ancient texts must be an obscurantist and must be silenced > by > > > > force, or by means of abuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ ==== ============ ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Sunil Bhattacharjya > > > > <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinayji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say that the location of the physical planets are different > from > > > > the actual locations of the grahas but Vedavyasa does not agree with > > > > you. Will you say that Vedavyasa did not have spiritual knowledge > which > > > > you claim to possess? Vedavyasa said that at the time of the > Mahabharata > > > > war the Saturn (physical planet) was in Visakha nakshatra (physical > > > > location) and that it was tormenting Rohini. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that Suniljee wants you to demonstrate your computing > power > > > > like a madaari. Far from it I wanted to you to demonstarte you > computing > > > > abilities like Shakuntal devi did and nobody has any doubt on her > > > > computing ability. Do you want to say Shakuntala Devi is a > madaari(ni)? > > > > Why do you interpret things in the wrong way more usually than > > > > otherwuse? Or is it that you cannot prove it and want a face-saving > exit > > > > from the topic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) As regards Tantra you misinformed the AIA group by saying that > > > > Tantra is un-Vedic and I simply corrected it and told you that the > > > > Kularnava tantra traces its origin to Veda. Then you said that in > Tantra > > > > one has to get drunk heavily. I only corrected it by saying that > Tantra > > > > recommends that one should take the substitutes. Then there is also > the > > > > alternative procedure of Alipaan, which a symbolical drinking of a > drop. > > > > However in case of one, who is used to drinking wines, only two-Tolas > > > > (ie. one ounce of wine, which is less than the safe limit of wine > > > > permitted by the World Health Organisation) was allowed. Now please do > > > > not pose the question as to whether the Tantric masters consulted WHO > > > > before fixing the two Tolas. You have already made enough of cheap fun > > > > of the Two Tolas due to your ignorance of the Tantric norms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Vinayji please speak out only what is true. Which foul word did > I > > > > use? Please have the guts to tell the forum. Please leave your dirty > > > > tactics of false accusations. Also your claim that one has to be a > > > > lifeong Brahmachari to get spiritual knowledge is all bullshit. In the > > > > ancient times all the sages like Vasishtha were married. The ancient > > > > Kumaras and only a few others were balabrahmachari. From the > > > > biographical details that we have of Adi Sankaracharya he told his > > > > mother that his longevity (ayu) was less and that he would die unless > he > > > > became a sanyashi. I do not think Adi Sankaracharya wanted to fool his > > > > mother. Moreove of the sankara mathas the Sankaracharyas of the > > > > Govardhana Math were grihashthis in their purvashrama. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) You never told that your book on Suryasiddhanta was on the > > > > Internet website but you pretended to get annoyed with me and you said > > > > that you are going to delete that from your website so that I don't > get > > > > to see it. Please do not play such dirty tricks. If you want to delete > > > > it you can very well do it as it is your prerogative. Now I am > convinced > > > > that a book coming from a person of such attitude may not be worth > > > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that in the AIA group Chandrahariji did use strong words > in > > > > the beginning only because of your unproven and unprovable tall > claims. > > > > I had, at one time, a lot of correspondence with Chandrahariji and we > > > > respected each other even though we did not agree in several things. > All > > > > other people including Sreenadhji in the AIA group were very polite > > > > towards you. They never used a single strong word against you. In fact > I > > > > also supported you in the beginning. But your much- vaunted > scholarship > > > > remained only in your assertions and claims. In your every mail you > used > > > > bring up what Chandrahariji wrote in the beginning to you and you > > > > threatened that you will quit that group and to keep your word you had > > > > to quit. Sreenadhji, the owners and the moderators were very tolerant > > > > towards you and I do not think that you were ousted from the group > but > > > > yourself made your position very precarious there and you left > > > > ignominiously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -SKB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 4/1/09, Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 9:37 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will never know what secrets I possess due to your foul > > > > language. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I could see that you were not being able to manage > strong > > > > solid arguments or proofs of what you claimed in front of Marg, which > > > > weakness she understood and played with you, till you left back > doors. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Margie is adamant on discussing ONLY the physical proofs of > > > > astronomical observation in ancient India, brcause she knows that > > > > ancient indian astrology was not based on physical observation but on > > > > revelations. She has an agenda, and does not want to discuss what > India > > > > really can offer. She has a negative attitude which no one can change. > > > > She and you do not know what I wanted to offer, because I never > > > > explained what I have. My unwillingness to explain is taken by you to > be > > > > my inability. You say : " Unfortunately you have been able to prove > > > > nothing of your tall claims on a single forum. " AIA was the only forum > > > > where I had agreed to provode proofs and discuss in detail, but a > > > > handful of cronies hired by Sreenadh never stopped abusing me and > never > > > > allowed any free and fair discussion. In no other forum I started such > a > > > > discussion. I never wanted to prove anything to you, because you were > > > > never interested in anything about my methods and often wanted to know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > everything in a paragraph which was impossible. You are a > > > > professional astrologer and I am a software developer plus a > researcher. > > > > We are poles apart. I avoid clients. I am not you competitor because I > > > > do not earn money from astrology. I never wanted to become a me,ber of > > > > any forum. It was Sreenadh who requested me to join, and later > > > > singled me out for abusive bahaviour without any provocation. Later, > > > > some other forums invited me and asked me to join their and other > > > > forums. Sohams is the only forum which had not invited me. But I > joined > > > > Sohams because matters pertaining to me were raised there by others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know forums are not a right place for me, because all > these > > > > forums are populated by users of softwares made along modern astronomy > > > > which I have found to be far inferior ASTROLOGICALLY in comparison to > > > > Suryasiddhantic software. Initially I also used and made softwares > based > > > > on modern astronomy. I have no hatred for modern scient, I am a > > > > recognized scientist myself. it is the misapplication of physical > > > > science in a metaphysical discipline like astrology which I oppose. > But > > > > if someone does not want to test Suryasiddhantic software, it is not > > > > going to harm me in the least, because I do not sell any software. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say : " I still do not understand what secrets are you trying > to > > > > give us, except that by using your software we will become very good > > > > astrologers ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and > > > > impudence... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a software developer who used principles different from those > > > > used by all other software developers. You are passing judgment on my > > > > work without testing my work. If you are not interested in testing my > > > > software, I will never ask you to test it. But , then, why are you > > > > wasting my and you time ? Forget me and my works if you find it not > > > > worth testing and reading. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are mistaken in saying that I am trying to give some secrets > to > > > > you. I never tried. Secrets are given to worthy persons. The first > > > > criterion of worth is Curiosity (jijnaasaa). You have no jijnaasaa > about > > > > my method. why should I waste my time over you ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I clearly mentioned my methods with practical examples in a > > > > non- forum last year. Those who read my explanations are using my > > > > software and reporting it to be performing wonderfully. Some persons > > > > fail to install it. But only two persons have taken an oath to waste > my > > > > time over futile discussions leading nowhere : you and Mr Sunil > > > > Bhattacharya. These two persons deliberately diverted my topic in AIA > on > > > > Tantric Astrology to wine and women, knowing full well that a lifelong > > > > brahmachaari like me will not like to participate in such a > discussion. > > > > Winw and women have no place in Tantric Astrology. Ancient tantric > texts > > > > are the original sources of 84 chakras, some of whom are well known, > > > > like panch-shalaakaa and sapta-shalaakaa chakras, sapta-naadi chakra, > > > > sarvatobhadra chakra, koorma chakra, etc. A good topic was destroyed. > > > > Recently, Mr Sunil Bhattacharya wasted a lot of my time and then > started > > > > using foul words. you are also adamant on wasting my and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > time. Have you no business ? If I am a bad guy, either forget me > or > > > > ask the moderators to ban me. Do not send useless and uncivil posts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, April 2, 2009 12:02:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ha Ha. That was a good one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See now you dont understand, The other people who are against > indian > > > > culture and Indian vedic astrology, would now take advantage after > > > > seeing this differences between us, which i did not want. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Being inebriated, is not my forte unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I mentoned about your being crushed only because I could see that > > > > you were not being able to manage strong solid arguments or proofs of > > > > what you claimed in front of Marg, which weakness she understood and > > > > played with you, till you left back doors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See how you have called me ignorant, the Moderator here as > ignorant, > > > > but i still feel that You have some knowledge, and I also feel that > Marg > > > > has got good knowledge and the Moderator here is the wisest person > whom > > > > i have ever encountered with. He will not enter the thread unless it > > > > leads to someone abusing the other one. Now do you call these > statements > > > > as under the influence of liquor , or the ones made by Your goodeself > ( > > > > ??). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mail you have just presented, I have received the likes of > same, > > > > in thousands on various groups, which still does not make me Pompous, > > > > impudent or proud, because I know my shortcomings in astrology, which > > > > these people who send me praise mails do not. I always have my feet > > > > planted firmly on the ground. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately you have been able to prove nothing of your tall > > > > claims on a single forum, since last 6 months of lingering on these, > and > > > > you tried to impress a smart member Marg here and once again showed > the > > > > torn spots in your claims which amount to nought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I still do not understand what secrets are you trying to give us, > > > > except that by using your software we will become very good > astrologers > > > > ? Otherwise we are not so ? This is really boasting and impudence, and > > > > not what I have mentioned which speaks of confidence in my knowledge > > > > acquired through years of study and nights spent in reading and > > > > analysing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously think that you need some rest and time to study > actually > > > > what you are trying to claim. because neither have you proved yourself > > > > to me, neither to marg, and neither to any member of the various > groups > > > > you have entered and been showed the door, I am sorry to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now lets stop discussing when you have nothing in your kitty, > > > > otherwise the Moderator here will throw me even out, because of you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > ...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar Jee, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your redcent mail was written under the influence of > > > > liquor, otherwise you would not have boasted thus : " Without my > support > > > > you would have been crushed by now....You will certainly need my > > > > certificates because I rule the roost on the Forums. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither do I need certficates from impudent and ignorant persons > > > > like you, nor do I wish to waste my time in those forums whose > > > > moderators pass such mindless messages as posted by you recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your statement is false " Your books, articles web pages have > > > > nothing conclusive to mention " , because you did not read my works, as > > > > you yourself say " I just visited your site for once, and that only for > 1 > > > > minute. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You say " Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > persons who are trying to do so. " Why you think yourself to be 99% ? > > > > Recent version was successfully downloaded by 59.66 % persons who > > > > attempted. Remaining 40% had viruses or similar problems. Had the > > > > software been defective, everyone would have failed to download and > use > > > > it. Read a recent email to me : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > praNaam sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sir ur software is pretty accurate! i know u know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that already and u dont need any confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from anyone else. just thought i should let u > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know.i just felt like responding cause i felt i was being > negative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the last time(about fonts and vb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > errors). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and its accurate till prana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dashas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the hindi fonts are also back to normal once i > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removed the fancy skins for windows (windows blinds). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > using default windows theme now and can see itrans > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > normally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it said danger from fire. the very day my kitchen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was full of lpg with all the windows closed!! pipe broken.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > another time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my firend fought with a lady manager and it was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there in the prana dasha (bphs)...... .... " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ = ============ == > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 10:59:59 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even i would prefer a " ji " rather than a " Mr. " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, Your software is not being downloaded by 99% of the > > > > persons who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are trying to do so. So unless we download your software , You > > > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove that you know " something " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You will certainly need my certificates because I rule the roost > > > > on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Forums, if I may dare say this with some pride of my knowledge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am ready to receive knowledge from even a small boy but not > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > somebody who just talks and preaches but never practises. I mean > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says that he has got a Kohinoor Diamond, but in reality has just > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glass pieces in his kitty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your books, articles web pages have nothing conclusive to > mention > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > culminate in, so whats the use of spending few precious hours on > > > > them ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You came with a Big Bang in all the Groups, but what we thought > > > > was a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mountain, turned out to be a mole hill. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my Dear frioend Mr.Vinay , if you dont wish to prove > yourself > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > why are you making so much tall claims about the origin of > indian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology which you cannot prove even to a single member of this > > > > Group ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had to help you every time. Without my support you would have > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crushed by now. So what have you got ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 6 months you have been playing the same tune from the > > > > broken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guitar string, that " I have got astrological secrets " , but > none > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you been able to produce uptil now. You have not been able to > > > > prove > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever you have claimed uptil now. Instead you spoil our name > in > > > > front > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of foreign astrologers like Marg with whom you cant discuss > > > > convincingly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but just rattling in the air. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You are not in a mood to prove, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If You dont have enough stuff to claim, then dont claim. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will not miss your books or whatever you have removed, > because > > > > I just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > visited your site for once, and that only for 1 minute, because > I > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > gauge the depth of the knowledge you profess to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to abusing you, at least I am not doing this, but > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always helped you, which help you cannot understand, with your > > > > present > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set up of mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you have some potential, but unfortunately you have > started > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > selling your mangoes before they have turned ripe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > > > > ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar wrote : " Mr.Vinay this last part of the message is > > > > for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have yet to see > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your proficiency either in Astrology, Astronomy, or > Mathematics. > > > > You > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have stirred the Hornests nest with no contribution. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Bhaskar was in good humour for quite some time, but now he > > > > appears > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to relapse into his former moods. I do not need his > certificates. > > > > He has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > refused to read my books, articles, papers and webpages and says > I > > > > made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no contribution. Today, I removed my book on Suryasiddhanta and > > > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > article from my webpage due to offensive language of Sunil > > > > Bhattacharya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jee. Now I may remove the rest. Knowledge is not given to > abusers. > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > never demanded anyone to show his/her capabilities or keep > quiet. > > > > When I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to elaborate (in AIA) the accurate method of Mundane > > > > Astrology of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ancient Yaamala Tantras, those very persons prevented any > > > > discussion on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrology who are now asking me to prove my worth. I am in no > need > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prove myself. After a lifelong of research, I developed some > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares which these persons are under an oath not to use, and > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > asking me to prove my worth. If I am worthless, ask the > moderators > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ban me. I will teach my methods only to my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disciples, never to those who had predicted that I will sell > my > > > > free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > softwares in future. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -VJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wednesday, April 1, 2009 9:43:08 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Dating of Ramayana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all, I remind those who have read the Ramayana here, > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish does have a reference in Ramayana, and not just at one > > > > place, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but more than one . If the Ramayana is to be believed, then the > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > made over Lanka is to be believed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the bridge over Lanka is to be believed , then the Adams > > > > bridge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovered by NASA , is to be believed. And if NASA is to be > > > > believed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the dates given by the Worlds best authorities about the > time > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge was built, is also to be believed, which matches with the > > > > Ramayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occurrence. And all authorities are univocal in confirming that > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bridge cannot be built naturally.Such a clear proof than what > the > > > > whole > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world has seen, defies skeptics and dis belief any which way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now can anyone bring us better and pre-dated references than > > > > this to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disapprove India's sovereignty in being the King of astrology > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who have read the Bhagawat know the reference of Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned therein. Those who do not believe in Krishna would now > > > > have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take an about turn since archeological discoveries are in fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > confirming the underwater city through their findings . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > & gt% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all, Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request you all to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever had any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues (read fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter away their precious time and energy. Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few months now, I do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay Jha ji’s knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination to go through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth. We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I (and some others like me) can handle with some level of justification. Moreover, this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our core subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of history and astronomy. Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core interest. Regards Neelam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear Neelamji, I had already opted out of this thread some time back, but came back again, as it was repeatedly mentioned again and again that all Astrologers who accept money are " Chandalas " . I had ignored this comment once or twice, but this coming again and again, demands the reader to ask for an explanation. I am yet to receive the refrence for the above quoted term from the MBh and Manusmriti. I also hoppe that the refrence is given alongwith the cotext in which it was spoken so as it can be guaged as to why this comment was made in the first place, if it was made at all in the aforesaid texts. Because I can sense some twisting and misinterpretaion done here to suit individual purpose and lend support to ones own claims of nothing tangible. About the Poojaris, doing Pooja and accepting money also being called as Chandalas, and the surgeons who charge fees for their Chikitsa, also I am wondering why has this not been put up on the National Channels, that they are actually Chandalas. I would not mind with the current state of affairs, to being put in the " minority " section so that i could also take great many advantages awarded to these sections, from the present day government since i am a Chandala. regards/Bhaskar. , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote: > > Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all, > > Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by > volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request you all > to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever had > any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues (read > fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined > initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter away > their precious time and energy. > > Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and > agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few months now, I > do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay Jha ji's > knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination to go > through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a > diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth. > > We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay > profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I (and > some others like me) can handle with some level of justification. Moreover, > this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our core > subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of > history and astronomy. > > Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core > interest. > > Regards > Neelam > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear Bhaskar ji, Your resistance is understandable. It is painful to see a scholar like Vinay ji use such terminology which has no basis in any Shastra and so also in modern way of thinking. As far as I know, astrologers are forbidden to ask or accept an unjustified amount for their services. Though going by the flexibility granted to us in the desh-kaal-patra tenet, what is ‘justified’ would also need to be defined for this modern materialistic kaal and modern astro-paatras. Till astrology remains a poor-man’s, or a beggar’s profession, we cannot hope to have modern, intelligent and competent human resource adopting astrology as a branch of studies or profession. While Chandalas (with due respect to them), in the modern era may be more suited to pack the political and bureaucratic corridors, I would like to see astrologers come up like technocrats and doctors, happily and ungrudgingly doing justice to their rewarding (also monetarily) advisory role. Regards Neelam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 TO ALL : An astrological issue of great importance is being declared to be non-astrological. I am amused to find the same team here united against me without any reason and with abuses, which fruatrated my attempts to discuss anything worthwhile in AIA. I am surprised at their teamspirit and want to point out the underlying causes which is the cementing force uniting them, and what harm they are doing to astrology. First of all, I will like to answer Bhaskarji's charge that I am abusing all astrologers as chaandaalas without providing any refernce to Manusmriti and MBh. In answer, I am quoting recent mail of Sunilji in this thread " Kaulji said that the astrologers are Chandalas without knowing that any dishonest person in any profession is a Chandala. He did not accept that astrology was known in the ancient times in India though he himself said that Manu mentioned that astrologers are not to be invited to participate in Devakarya and Pitrikarya and he was withholding the fact the physicians and the temple priest are also not to be invited for ...... " It was Kaulji who said all astrologers are chaandaalas according to Manusmriti. Sunilji corerected him by adding that according to Manu not only all astrologers but all physicians and all temple priests are also chaandaalas. I countered this misinterpretation of Manusmriti by Sunilji, and said that only those astrologers, physicians and priests were declared to be chaandaalas who made a living out of these professions. This is literal meaning. In my view, astrologers and others need money to live in this world and therefore have a right to accept dakshinaa. I know a large number of pandits who adhere to this principle and accept dakshinaa but do not ask for fees. I could have accepted dakshinaas had I not been provided with alternative source for livlihood. Hence, the real sense of manusmriti must have been that only thugs are chaandaalas who pose as astrologers & c but are actually after the pockets of their clients. It is strange that Bhaskarji is forgiving Sunulji who made false and derogatory remarks against all astrologers & c, and is inciting all members here on false pretexts. I merely corrected Sunilji who was making a misinterpretation. Why Bhaskarji does not ask Sunilji to provide the verse, which will make it clear who is lying about Manusmriti and who is leveling false charge on me ? Instead, Bhaskarji call me a hypocrite and concludes that I have " nothing to offer " . Neelamji joined the fray against me, as she did in AIA, concluding that my mails have " any nugget of worth " , repeating Bhaskarji's charge that I am good for nothing, and sympathising with Bhaskarji's false charges against me that I call all astrologers as chaandaalas ( " It is painful to see a scholar like Vinay ji use such terminology which has no basis in any Shastra " ). I am being charged of what was actually said by Sunilji, whom Neelamji hails as a good umpire to judge me (earlier she had hailed Chandrahariji who could pass a verdict on me). Now, Sreenadhji has also joined in this fray ( cf. http://dir./message/22847 : " Does those parasites in search of a free meal will feed the family of the astrologer or what?! " . Although I adhere to strict rules of sanyasa, I need not beg for free meals because I have permanent source of income. But I am a parasite, because I distribute my works freely !! These same people have abused all astrologers who are now falsely blaming me for doing so, I only corrected the reference. These people do not know how to quote, how to read and how to behave in a forum. Neelam Gupta is a liar because she charges me of offering " a second line of predictive astrology " . I had made it clear in AIA and in my website that I strictly adhere to Parashara's predictive astrology (BPHS & c). Why she is leveling a false charge on me ? These persons want to ban ( " shun " as bhaskarji said) a person like me who is advocating the rules of sages in the field of Vedic Astrrology. Neelam Gupta should ask Sunilji to stop diverting the discussion away from astrology. Instead, she is accusing me of this diversion. I never liked any discussion on history, because I am basically a software developer and lengthy discussion not related to current problems of practical astrology hampers my work. But those very persons are charging me of diversion who are themselves guilty of diverting the topic on astrology to history or to wine and even to sex (I have in store previous mails of these fellows, some of which contained nothing but obscene abuses to my mother and sister). In AIA, I had also quoted a message from PVR Narasimhaji, supported by Sanjay Rath ji, which said that the team of Chandrahariji is too dogmatic to listen to others. This same team is after my flesh and blood now. Lastly, I must answer the useless message of Sunilji who is hellbent on diverting astrological discussions to other things merely with a view to malign me and get me banned.He wants a discussion on my technical paper on weather forecasting and teleconnections in an astrological forum. How many members here know the meaning of " teleconnections " in weather science ? I am sorry to note that Sunilji regards a difference of 1.7 years as merely " a fraction of a year " !! He rejects the very existence of 61-year ctcle because he fails to understand a scientific paper. His first charge is I had " not given any substantive data " . I worked on already existing data of IITM ,Pune which I cited in reference-10 which were originally for 1871-1978 but are constantly being updated (I also used 1813-2007 dataset from IITM, but it was only for ISMR and not for whole years, hence I could not use it properly). Sunilji can get these datasest from IITM (Pune) and check for himself whether I worked without authentic data or not. Why should I fill up my paper with data well known to weather scientists ? I was asked my referees to remove well known items in order to present only new things. I lucidly explained in my paper how I used and analyzed that dataset. His second charge is that I gave no repeat cycles and gave no dates of any particular year in my paper. Either his eyesight is defective or his intentions are far from sincere. I gave comparison of two cycles in six figures, of three cycles in one figure and of four cycles in one figure ( Fig-1,2,3,4,6,7,9) . Annual data of only 136 years are availabe in the case of India, which could facilitate comparision of only two whole cycles of 61 years, and partial comparison of three cycles (1813-2007 dataset can give more span but less reliability due lack of whole year's data). Surprisingly, Sunilji asks me to work on " at least two or three centuries " ; he does not even know that rainfall data for India does not exist for so long periods. Clearly, he is a novice in this field, but Neelamji thanks him for " volunteering to be the good umpire " ! The referees of IISc or experts of NASA were unfit, and a chemist like Sunilji should judge my work ! Why he does not inform the referees of CAOS, IISc that they erred in selecting my paper ? Sunilji falsely says that my paper does not give years clearly. My paper ( http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting ) says : " 1957 AD is numbered 87 (= 1957 - 1870 ) and will be found in the second series in blue . When the second curve was superimposed upon the first one, shape of both waveforms coincided in a majority of cases when the gap between both series was chosen to be 61 years. Waveform of 1891-1923 ( year nos. 21-53 ) had an similarity in shape with that of 1952-1984 ( year numbers 82-114) in 25 out of 33 years , only 8 years were out of phase. " Even a cursory glance at Fig-2 in my paper will convince any unbiased onlooker that annual rainfall waveform replicate the waveform of 61-years away for 50% of the time, even if we change 61 to 60 or to 62, this replication will cease. Why Sunilji deliberately falsifies an important discovery is not difficult to guess. He has a prejuduce for 60-year Jovian cycle, and cannot accept any new fact against his prejudice. The Jovian cycle is quite different from the solar cycle of 61 years. Due to his prejudices, Sunilji is deliberately falsifying data and facts. He says about me " He does not even know how to write a scientific paper properly and to report authentically. " Unfortunately, it is Sunilji whio does not even know how to read a scientific paper properly and to report honestly. As for the date of Kalidasa, I do not know his arguments for his dating of Kalidasa in 8th century BC. I have no access to his full paper, I got a passage quoted in another person's work. Hence, I neither accept nor refute his dating. But my knowledge of Sunilji's " scientific " temper leads me to suspect his dating has no substantiation. He had said that Suryasiddhanta had one hundred thousand verses. He makes wild statements and does not cite sources. I am repeating my earlier statement that the true date of Kalidasa can be judged only by procuring some old prints of Ritusamhara which contained a verse at the end stating the date and tithi, but era was not stated ; later publishers omitted this verse because they thought a text of literature should not contain a mathematical verse about dating written in archaic astrological language. I have a photocopy of that page, the worn out book is in the possession of an elderly person. Unfortunately, Sunilji pokes fun at all my statements without any reason. It is asign of his bizarre " scientific " attitude ! He is misguided by his ignorance in saying " Vinayji is wrong when he says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers are not peer-reviewed. " I never said Chandrahariji's papers were not published in peer-reviewed journals, I said that Chandrahariji published his wrong interprewtations of Suryasiddhanta in journals whose panel included peers of other disciplines, not a singlr expert of Suryasiddhanta was there. I can prove this statement in a court of law, as I have already done. There is no other cure for liars who pose as experts of texts which they do not understand. Neelamji is a light minded person who thinks the fundamental texts of Indian astrology should not be discussed and monsoon-cycles have nothiong to do with astrology. If she has no interest in serious issues, she can keep away from these topics and forget me. But no, the friends of Chandrahariji have a mission : they want to modify the meaning of Suryasiddhanta which is not possible as long as I am here. Hence, I must be hanged or fired. Friends, wait for some time. I am going to dispel all this fog created by a small team (from AIA), for which I need some time, for translating my works into English. Ancient Indian mundane astrology was a great science, which I want to bring to fore ; it will help in individual horoscopy as well. I have discovered nothing new. What Neelamji wants to ban is not " my " method, my only crime is that I made a free software out of this ancient method, which forms the bedrock of Jyotishaachaarya curriculum in all Sanskrit universities. Some supposedly " scientific " persons think all ancient things must be discarded, hence this hue and cry against me without even testing my free software !! Let them forget me and my software, why waste so much of time over me ? -VJ ============== ============== ============== , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote: > > Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all, > > Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by > volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request you all > to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever had > any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues (read > fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined > initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter away > their precious time and energy. > > Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and > agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few months now, I > do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay Jha ji's > knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination to go > through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a > diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth. > > We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay > profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I (and > some others like me) can handle with some level of justification. Moreover, > this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our core > subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of > history and astronomy. > > Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core > interest. > > Regards > Neelam > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Dear Vinay ji, Well now you have retracted your statements made against Astrologers, Poojaris and chikitsaks. If You have not said so then I take my words back. Nobody is after your blood Mr.Vinay. and nobody has formed any team, and nobody is against you. On the contrary those whom you consider as a team, we also have a lots of differences of opinions between each other, but we let those rest after 1-2 mails, do not make it a issue, do not elongate it, and respect each other by moving to some new thread etc. None of us are perfect so we do not want to strain relations but more interested in mantaining the same. I have read the Manusmriti when I was a child and will read it again if anyone wishes me to challenge this stand of the astrologers, Pundits and the chikitsakas being called as " Chandalas " is mentioned there in. You may be a good man, a Brahmachari, a Sanyasin, and much more, and you may become more greater by giving all a free software which helps them become better astrologers for whom the software works. I have no argument here. But why should we only use your software and then realise that you have come up with some great matter of astrological importance which never was , or never will be realised by anyone again. Why cant you explain in simple words what you have discovered and how it helps in predictive astrology. What changes are there in your software which others do not have ? Is it just your taking particular number of days as one year and basing the Vimsottari calculations based on that ? Or is there more than this ? What is it ? Why cant you explain the above instead of endless talks on subjects and people which does not matter to astrology rather disturbs the moods and spoils the relations and calls for more agitated responses ? regards, Bhaskar. .. , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > TO ALL : > > An astrological issue of great importance is being declared to be > non-astrological. > > I am amused to find the same team here united against me without any > reason and with abuses, which fruatrated my attempts to discuss anything > worthwhile in AIA. I am surprised at their teamspirit and want to point > out the underlying causes which is the cementing force uniting them, and > what harm they are doing to astrology. > > First of all, I will like to answer Bhaskarji's charge that I am abusing > all astrologers as chaandaalas without providing any refernce to > Manusmriti and MBh. In answer, I am quoting recent mail of Sunilji in > this thread " Kaulji said that the astrologers are Chandalas without > knowing that any dishonest person in any profession is a Chandala. He > did not accept that astrology was known in the ancient times in India > though he himself said that Manu mentioned that astrologers are not to > be invited to participate in Devakarya and Pitrikarya and he was > withholding the fact the physicians and the temple priest are also not > to be invited for ...... " > > It was Kaulji who said all astrologers are chaandaalas according to > Manusmriti. Sunilji corerected him by adding that according to Manu not > only all astrologers but all physicians and all temple priests are also > chaandaalas. I countered this misinterpretation of Manusmriti by > Sunilji, and said that only those astrologers, physicians and priests > were declared to be chaandaalas who made a living out of these > professions. This is literal meaning. In my view, astrologers and others > need money to live in this world and therefore have a right to accept > dakshinaa. I know a large number of pandits who adhere to this principle > and accept dakshinaa but do not ask for fees. I could have accepted > dakshinaas had I not been provided with alternative source for > livlihood. Hence, the real sense of manusmriti must have been that only > thugs are chaandaalas who pose as astrologers & c but are actually after > the pockets of their clients. It is strange that Bhaskarji is forgiving > Sunulji who made false and derogatory remarks against all astrologers > & c, and is inciting all members here on false pretexts. I merely > corrected Sunilji who was making a misinterpretation. Why Bhaskarji does > not ask Sunilji to provide the verse, which will make it clear who is > lying about Manusmriti and who is leveling false charge on me ? Instead, > Bhaskarji call me a hypocrite and concludes that I have " nothing to > offer " . > > Neelamji joined the fray against me, as she did in AIA, concluding that > my mails have " any nugget of worth " , repeating Bhaskarji's charge that I > am good for nothing, and sympathising with Bhaskarji's false charges > against me that I call all astrologers as chaandaalas ( " It is painful to > see a scholar like Vinay ji use such terminology which has no basis in > any Shastra " ). I am being charged of what was actually said by Sunilji, > whom Neelamji hails as a good umpire to judge me (earlier she had hailed > Chandrahariji who could pass a verdict on me). Now, Sreenadhji has also > joined in this fray ( cf. > http://dir./message/22847 : " Does > those parasites in search of a free meal will feed the family of the > astrologer or what?! " . Although I adhere to strict rules of sanyasa, I > need not beg for free meals because I have permanent source of income. > But I am a parasite, because I distribute my works freely !! These same > people have abused all astrologers who are now falsely blaming me for > doing so, I only corrected the reference. These people do not know how > to quote, how to read and how to behave in a forum. > > Neelam Gupta is a liar because she charges me of offering " a second line > of predictive astrology " . I had made it clear in AIA and in my website > that I strictly adhere to Parashara's predictive astrology (BPHS & c). > Why she is leveling a false charge on me ? These persons want to ban > ( " shun " as bhaskarji said) a person like me who is advocating the rules > of sages in the field of Vedic Astrrology. Neelam Gupta should ask > Sunilji to stop diverting the discussion away from astrology. Instead, > she is accusing me of this diversion. I never liked any discussion on > history, because I am basically a software developer and lengthy > discussion not related to current problems of practical astrology > hampers my work. But those very persons are charging me of diversion who > are themselves guilty of diverting the topic on astrology to history or > to wine and even to sex (I have in store previous mails of these > fellows, some of which contained nothing but obscene abuses to my mother > and sister). In AIA, I had also quoted a message from PVR Narasimhaji, > supported by Sanjay Rath ji, which said that the team of Chandrahariji > is too dogmatic to listen to others. This same team is after my flesh > and blood now. > > Lastly, I must answer the useless message of Sunilji who is hellbent on > diverting astrological discussions to other things merely with a view to > malign me and get me banned.He wants a discussion on my technical paper > on weather forecasting and teleconnections in an astrological forum. How > many members here know the meaning of " teleconnections " in weather > science ? I am sorry to note that Sunilji regards a difference of 1.7 > years as merely " a fraction of a year " !! He rejects the very existence > of 61-year ctcle because he fails to understand a scientific paper. His > first charge is I had " not given any substantive data " . I worked on > already existing data of IITM ,Pune which I cited in reference-10 which > were originally for 1871-1978 but are constantly being updated (I also > used 1813-2007 dataset from IITM, but it was only for ISMR and not for > whole years, hence I could not use it properly). Sunilji can get these > datasest from IITM (Pune) and check for himself whether I worked without > authentic data or not. Why should I fill up my paper with data well > known to weather scientists ? I was asked my referees to remove well > known items in order to present only new things. I lucidly explained in > my paper how I used and analyzed that dataset. > > His second charge is that I gave no repeat cycles and gave no dates of > any particular year in my paper. Either his eyesight is defective or his > intentions are far from sincere. I gave comparison of two cycles in six > figures, of three cycles in one figure and of four cycles in one figure > ( Fig-1,2,3,4,6,7,9) . Annual data of only 136 years are availabe in the > case of India, which could facilitate comparision of only two whole > cycles of 61 years, and partial comparison of three cycles (1813-2007 > dataset can give more span but less reliability due lack of whole year's > data). Surprisingly, Sunilji asks me to work on " at least two or three > centuries " ; he does not even know that rainfall data for India does not > exist for so long periods. Clearly, he is a novice in this field, but > Neelamji thanks him for " volunteering to be the good umpire " ! The > referees of IISc or experts of NASA were unfit, and a chemist like > Sunilji should judge my work ! Why he does not inform the referees of > CAOS, IISc that they erred in selecting my paper ? > > Sunilji falsely says that my paper does not give years clearly. My paper > ( > http://weatherindia.wetpaint.com/page/A+New+approach+to+Rain+Forecasting > ) says : " 1957 AD is numbered 87 (= 1957 - 1870 ) and will be found in > the second series in blue . When the second curve was superimposed upon > the first one, shape of both waveforms coincided in a majority of cases > when the gap between both series was chosen to be 61 years. Waveform of > 1891-1923 ( year nos. 21-53 ) had an similarity in shape with that of > 1952-1984 ( year numbers 82-114) in 25 out of 33 years , only 8 years > were out of phase. " Even a cursory glance at Fig-2 in my paper will > convince any unbiased onlooker that annual rainfall waveform replicate > the waveform of 61-years away for 50% of the time, even if we change 61 > to 60 or to 62, this replication will cease. Why Sunilji deliberately > falsifies an important discovery is not difficult to guess. He has a > prejuduce for 60-year Jovian cycle, and cannot accept any new fact > against his prejudice. The Jovian cycle is quite different from the > solar cycle of 61 years. Due to his prejudices, Sunilji is deliberately > falsifying data and facts. He says about me " He does not even know how > to write a scientific paper properly and to report authentically. " > Unfortunately, it is Sunilji whio does not even know how to read a > scientific paper properly and to report honestly. > > As for the date of Kalidasa, I do not know his arguments for his dating > of Kalidasa in 8th century BC. I have no access to his full paper, I got > a passage quoted in another person's work. Hence, I neither accept nor > refute his dating. But my knowledge of Sunilji's " scientific " temper > leads me to suspect his dating has no substantiation. He had said that > Suryasiddhanta had one hundred thousand verses. He makes wild statements > and does not cite sources. I am repeating my earlier statement that the > true date of Kalidasa can be judged only by procuring some old prints of > Ritusamhara which contained a verse at the end stating the date and > tithi, but era was not stated ; later publishers omitted this verse > because they thought a text of literature should not contain a > mathematical verse about dating written in archaic astrological > language. I have a photocopy of that page, the worn out book is in the > possession of an elderly person. Unfortunately, Sunilji pokes fun at all > my statements without any reason. It is asign of his bizarre > " scientific " attitude ! > > He is misguided by his ignorance in saying " Vinayji is wrong when he > says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers are not > peer-reviewed. " I never said Chandrahariji's papers were not published > in peer-reviewed journals, I said that Chandrahariji published his wrong > interprewtations of Suryasiddhanta in journals whose panel included > peers of other disciplines, not a singlr expert of Suryasiddhanta was > there. I can prove this statement in a court of law, as I have already > done. There is no other cure for liars who pose as experts of texts > which they do not understand. Neelamji is a light minded person who > thinks the fundamental texts of Indian astrology should not be discussed > and monsoon-cycles have nothiong to do with astrology. If she has no > interest in serious issues, she can keep away from these topics and > forget me. But no, the friends of Chandrahariji have a mission : they > want to modify the meaning of Suryasiddhanta which is not possible as > long as I am here. Hence, I must be hanged or fired. > > Friends, wait for some time. I am going to dispel all this fog created > by a small team (from AIA), for which I need some time, for translating > my works into English. Ancient Indian mundane astrology was a great > science, which I want to bring to fore ; it will help in individual > horoscopy as well. I have discovered nothing new. What Neelamji wants to > ban is not " my " method, my only crime is that I made a free software out > of this ancient method, which forms the bedrock of Jyotishaachaarya > curriculum in all Sanskrit universities. Some supposedly " scientific " > persons think all ancient things must be discarded, hence this hue and > cry against me without even testing my free software !! Let them forget > me and my software, why waste so much of time over me ? > > -VJ > ============== ============== ============== > , neelam gupta neelamgupta07@ > wrote: > > > > Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all, > > > > Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by > > volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request > you all > > to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever > had > > any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues > (read > > fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined > > initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter > away > > their precious time and energy. > > > > Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and > > agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few > months now, I > > do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay > Jha ji's > > knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination > to go > > through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a > > diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth. > > > > We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay > > profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I > (and > > some others like me) can handle with some level of justification. > Moreover, > > this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our > core > > subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of > > history and astronomy. > > > > Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core > > interest. > > > > Regards > > Neelam > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2009 Report Share Posted April 6, 2009 Bhaskar ji, I requested Sunilji again and again not to drag me into history or astronomy, not because I was not interested in history or astronomy, but because it is an astrological forum where I wanted to discuss only simple astrological topics. But he would not relent. Let this thread be reserved for these useless charges and counter-charges, and let us begin a new thread for discussing astrological problems, without any personal attacks or diversions. I am starting that new thread with a title : " Some Cardinal Problems of Astrology " . I request you to join, but I also request you to see that this topic is not destroyed as so many earlier attempts were destoyed with personal attacks. I have no acrimony against you, Sunilji, Neelamji, Sreenadhji etc, because I know they are all misunderstanding me. All of them want good astrology ; I also want the same. Where is the difference ? The difference lies in an unwillingness to listen. It can be solved by shutting one's ears. They can refuse to listen to me. Why quarrel with me ? If someone imagines he can mute my voice he is utterly mistaken. I have just begun on the internet. I have not opened all my cards, which will become yours the moment you try to understaqnd and use my cards, because my cards are not mine. I discovered nothing new. Good Wishes, -VJ ________________________________ Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Monday, April 6, 2009 5:04:53 PM Re: Greeks vs Indians <HOLY JEUS!> Dear Vinay ji, Well now you have retracted your statements made against Astrologers, Poojaris and chikitsaks. If You have not said so then I take my words back. Nobody is after your blood Mr.Vinay. and nobody has formed any team, and nobody is against you. On the contrary those whom you consider as a team, we also have a lots of differences of opinions between each other, but we let those rest after 1-2 mails, do not make it a issue, do not elongate it, and respect each other by moving to some new thread etc. None of us are perfect so we do not want to strain relations but more interested in mantaining the same. I have read the Manusmriti when I was a child and will read it again if anyone wishes me to challenge this stand of the astrologers, Pundits and the chikitsakas being called as " Chandalas " is mentioned there in. You may be a good man, a Brahmachari, a Sanyasin, and much more, and you may become more greater by giving all a free software which helps them become better astrologers for whom the software works. I have no argument here. But why should we only use your software and then realise that you have come up with some great matter of astrological importance which never was , or never will be realised by anyone again. Why cant you explain in simple words what you have discovered and how it helps in predictive astrology. What changes are there in your software which others do not have ? Is it just your taking particular number of days as one year and basing the Vimsottari calculations based on that ? Or is there more than this ? What is it ? Why cant you explain the above instead of endless talks on subjects and people which does not matter to astrology rather disturbs the moods and spoils the relations and calls for more agitated responses ? regards, Bhaskar. .. , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > TO ALL : > > An astrological issue of great importance is being declared to be > non-astrological. > > I am amused to find the same team here united against me without any > reason and with abuses, which fruatrated my attempts to discuss anything > worthwhile in AIA. I am surprised at their teamspirit and want to point > out the underlying causes which is the cementing force uniting them, and > what harm they are doing to astrology. > > First of all, I will like to answer Bhaskarji's charge that I am abusing > all astrologers as chaandaalas without providing any refernce to > Manusmriti and MBh. In answer, I am quoting recent mail of Sunilji in > this thread " Kaulji said that the astrologers are Chandalas without > knowing that any dishonest person in any profession is a Chandala. He > did not accept that astrology was known in the ancient times in India > though he himself said that Manu mentioned that astrologers are not to > be invited to participate in Devakarya and Pitrikarya and he was > withholding the fact the physicians and the temple priest are also not > to be invited for ...... " > > It was Kaulji who said all astrologers are chaandaalas according to > Manusmriti. Sunilji corerected him by adding that according to Manu not > only all astrologers but all physicians and all temple priests are also > chaandaalas. I countered this misinterpretation of Manusmriti by > Sunilji, and said that only those astrologers, physicians and priests > were declared to be chaandaalas who made a living out of these > professions. This is literal meaning. In my view, astrologers and others > need money to live in this world and therefore have a right to accept > dakshinaa. I know a large number of pandits who adhere to this principle > and accept dakshinaa but do not ask for fees. I could have accepted > dakshinaas had I not been provided with alternative source for > livlihood. Hence, the real sense of manusmriti must have been that only > thugs are chaandaalas who pose as astrologers & c but are actually after > the pockets of their clients. It is strange that Bhaskarji is forgiving > Sunulji who made false and derogatory remarks against all astrologers > & c, and is inciting all members here on false pretexts. I merely > corrected Sunilji who was making a misinterpretation. Why Bhaskarji does > not ask Sunilji to provide the verse, which will make it clear who is > lying about Manusmriti and who is leveling false charge on me ? Instead, > Bhaskarji call me a hypocrite and concludes that I have " nothing to > offer " . > > Neelamji joined the fray against me, as she did in AIA, concluding that > my mails have " any nugget of worth " , repeating Bhaskarji's charge that I > am good for nothing, and sympathising with Bhaskarji's false charges > against me that I call all astrologers as chaandaalas ( " It is painful to > see a scholar like Vinay ji use such terminology which has no basis in > any Shastra " ). I am being charged of what was actually said by Sunilji, > whom Neelamji hails as a good umpire to judge me (earlier she had hailed > Chandrahariji who could pass a verdict on me). Now, Sreenadhji has also > joined in this fray ( cf. > http://dir.groups. / group/JyotishGro up/message/ 22847 : " Does > those parasites in search of a free meal will feed the family of the > astrologer or what?! " . Although I adhere to strict rules of sanyasa, I > need not beg for free meals because I have permanent source of income. > But I am a parasite, because I distribute my works freely !! These same > people have abused all astrologers who are now falsely blaming me for > doing so, I only corrected the reference. These people do not know how > to quote, how to read and how to behave in a forum. > > Neelam Gupta is a liar because she charges me of offering " a second line > of predictive astrology " . I had made it clear in AIA and in my website > that I strictly adhere to Parashara's predictive astrology (BPHS & c). > Why she is leveling a false charge on me ? These persons want to ban > ( " shun " as bhaskarji said) a person like me who is advocating the rules > of sages in the field of Vedic Astrrology. Neelam Gupta should ask > Sunilji to stop diverting the discussion away from astrology. Instead, > she is accusing me of this diversion. I never liked any discussion on > history, because I am basically a software developer and lengthy > discussion not related to current problems of practical astrology > hampers my work. But those very persons are charging me of diversion who > are themselves guilty of diverting the topic on astrology to history or > to wine and even to sex (I have in store previous mails of these > fellows, some of which contained nothing but obscene abuses to my mother > and sister). In AIA, I had also quoted a message from PVR Narasimhaji, > supported by Sanjay Rath ji, which said that the team of Chandrahariji > is too dogmatic to listen to others. This same team is after my flesh > and blood now. > > Lastly, I must answer the useless message of Sunilji who is hellbent on > diverting astrological discussions to other things merely with a view to > malign me and get me banned.He wants a discussion on my technical paper > on weather forecasting and teleconnections in an astrological forum. How > many members here know the meaning of " teleconnections " in weather > science ? I am sorry to note that Sunilji regards a difference of 1.7 > years as merely " a fraction of a year " !! He rejects the very existence > of 61-year ctcle because he fails to understand a scientific paper. His > first charge is I had " not given any substantive data " . I worked on > already existing data of IITM ,Pune which I cited in reference-10 which > were originally for 1871-1978 but are constantly being updated (I also > used 1813-2007 dataset from IITM, but it was only for ISMR and not for > whole years, hence I could not use it properly). Sunilji can get these > datasest from IITM (Pune) and check for himself whether I worked without > authentic data or not. Why should I fill up my paper with data well > known to weather scientists ? I was asked my referees to remove well > known items in order to present only new things. I lucidly explained in > my paper how I used and analyzed that dataset. > > His second charge is that I gave no repeat cycles and gave no dates of > any particular year in my paper. Either his eyesight is defective or his > intentions are far from sincere. I gave comparison of two cycles in six > figures, of three cycles in one figure and of four cycles in one figure > ( Fig-1,2,3,4, 6,7,9) . Annual data of only 136 years are availabe in the > case of India, which could facilitate comparision of only two whole > cycles of 61 years, and partial comparison of three cycles (1813-2007 > dataset can give more span but less reliability due lack of whole year's > data). Surprisingly, Sunilji asks me to work on " at least two or three > centuries " ; he does not even know that rainfall data for India does not > exist for so long periods. Clearly, he is a novice in this field, but > Neelamji thanks him for " volunteering to be the good umpire " ! The > referees of IISc or experts of NASA were unfit, and a chemist like > Sunilji should judge my work ! Why he does not inform the referees of > CAOS, IISc that they erred in selecting my paper ? > > Sunilji falsely says that my paper does not give years clearly. My paper > ( > http://weatherindia .wetpaint. com/page/ A+New+approach+ to+Rain+Forecast ing > ) says : " 1957 AD is numbered 87 (= 1957 - 1870 ) and will be found in > the second series in blue . When the second curve was superimposed upon > the first one, shape of both waveforms coincided in a majority of cases > when the gap between both series was chosen to be 61 years. Waveform of > 1891-1923 ( year nos. 21-53 ) had an similarity in shape with that of > 1952-1984 ( year numbers 82-114) in 25 out of 33 years , only 8 years > were out of phase. " Even a cursory glance at Fig-2 in my paper will > convince any unbiased onlooker that annual rainfall waveform replicate > the waveform of 61-years away for 50% of the time, even if we change 61 > to 60 or to 62, this replication will cease. Why Sunilji deliberately > falsifies an important discovery is not difficult to guess. He has a > prejuduce for 60-year Jovian cycle, and cannot accept any new fact > against his prejudice. The Jovian cycle is quite different from the > solar cycle of 61 years. Due to his prejudices, Sunilji is deliberately > falsifying data and facts. He says about me " He does not even know how > to write a scientific paper properly and to report authentically. " > Unfortunately, it is Sunilji whio does not even know how to read a > scientific paper properly and to report honestly. > > As for the date of Kalidasa, I do not know his arguments for his dating > of Kalidasa in 8th century BC. I have no access to his full paper, I got > a passage quoted in another person's work. Hence, I neither accept nor > refute his dating. But my knowledge of Sunilji's " scientific " temper > leads me to suspect his dating has no substantiation. He had said that > Suryasiddhanta had one hundred thousand verses. He makes wild statements > and does not cite sources. I am repeating my earlier statement that the > true date of Kalidasa can be judged only by procuring some old prints of > Ritusamhara which contained a verse at the end stating the date and > tithi, but era was not stated ; later publishers omitted this verse > because they thought a text of literature should not contain a > mathematical verse about dating written in archaic astrological > language. I have a photocopy of that page, the worn out book is in the > possession of an elderly person. Unfortunately, Sunilji pokes fun at all > my statements without any reason. It is asign of his bizarre > " scientific " attitude ! > > He is misguided by his ignorance in saying " Vinayji is wrong when he > says that INSA (India National Science Academy) papers are not > peer-reviewed. " I never said Chandrahariji' s papers were not published > in peer-reviewed journals, I said that Chandrahariji published his wrong > interprewtations of Suryasiddhanta in journals whose panel included > peers of other disciplines, not a singlr expert of Suryasiddhanta was > there. I can prove this statement in a court of law, as I have already > done. There is no other cure for liars who pose as experts of texts > which they do not understand. Neelamji is a light minded person who > thinks the fundamental texts of Indian astrology should not be discussed > and monsoon-cycles have nothiong to do with astrology. If she has no > interest in serious issues, she can keep away from these topics and > forget me. But no, the friends of Chandrahariji have a mission : they > want to modify the meaning of Suryasiddhanta which is not possible as > long as I am here. Hence, I must be hanged or fired. > > Friends, wait for some time. I am going to dispel all this fog created > by a small team (from AIA), for which I need some time, for translating > my works into English. Ancient Indian mundane astrology was a great > science, which I want to bring to fore ; it will help in individual > horoscopy as well. I have discovered nothing new. What Neelamji wants to > ban is not " my " method, my only crime is that I made a free software out > of this ancient method, which forms the bedrock of Jyotishaachaarya > curriculum in all Sanskrit universities. Some supposedly " scientific " > persons think all ancient things must be discarded, hence this hue and > cry against me without even testing my free software !! Let them forget > me and my software, why waste so much of time over me ? > > -VJ > ============ == ============ == ============ == > , neelam gupta neelamgupta07@ > wrote: > > > > Dear RR ji, Sunil ji, Vinay ji and all, > > > > Welcome to this fray RR ji! And thanks for bringing in some hope by > > volunteering to be the good umpire, for a good cause. Can I request > you all > > to put an end to this series which has outlived its value, if it ever > had > > any. Enough matches have been played in public view at various venues > (read > > fora) without any conclusive results. Most of the players who joined > > initially have been smart enough to withdraw, not willing to fritter > away > > their precious time and energy. > > > > Having witnessed this futile exchange (amusingly, painstakingly and > > agonizingly and devastatingly… in that order), for quite a few > months now, I > > do not foresee a peaceful agreement here. With due regards to Vinay > Jha ji's > > knowledge and status, we really do not have the time and inclination > to go > > through the incoherent verbosity of the long-winded messages, with a > > diminutive hope of stumbling upon any nugget of worth. > > > > We cannot master everything in this short life. With one mainstay > > profession, a second line of predictive astrology is more than what I > (and > > some others like me) can handle with some level of justification. > Moreover, > > this is a Jyotish group, and technically we may perhaps discuss our > core > > subject only and not stray into the undesired and unrequited realms of > > history and astronomy. > > > > Hope I am not making an unfair request! Let us get on with our core > > interest. > > > > Regards > > Neelam > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.