[VRI] [Ind. & West. Astrology] Fwd: Reference for Rashi's in Vedas

[Guest guest]

Dear Members,

 

Namaste,

 

I wish to inform Avinash Sathaye, Darshaney Lokesh and Avtar Krishen Kaul that the Vedic scholars know that the Veda itself says that the words and verses in the Veda can have more than one meaning and in fact the Paroksha meaning is considered more appropriate than the Pratyaksja meaning. So please do not misinform the members of the group with your half knowledge. For example Rigveda says that Pulastya's son Agastya and Vasishtha were born in Kumbha. You can say that they were born in a pot because Kumbha ordinarily means a pot or kalash.. But a Vedic scholar will say that they wre born in Kumbha rashi.

 

Secondly why be selective about only one reference. The Rigveda has mentioned several Rashis and why did any of you not see the other references for the Rashis in the Veda if you are really interested and consider yourself so expert in interpreting the Rigvedic verses. The Vedas have the Rashis and that is irrefutable. Vedanga Jyotisha also says about the Meena and the other Rashis and I mentioned that earlier. Did that not waken up Avtar Krishen Kaul and his followers uptil now?

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

--- On Fri, 5/29/09, Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved wrote:

Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved[VRI] Re: [ind. & West. Astrology] Fwd: Reference for Rashi's in Vedasvedic_research_institute Date: Friday, May 29, 2009, 2:23 AM

 

 

Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, darshaney lokesh <darshaneylokesh@ ...> wrote:Dear members, Namastey. ' UDDHEDABHI SHRUTAMAGHAM VRASHBHAM NARYAMPASAM. ASTAARAMESHI SURYA ' In this RICHA the word VRASHABHAM doesnot mean the Vrishabh Rashi at all. I can also give you its' detailed explanation if desired. In short, it is just liketalking of Mecca- Madina from the following referred verse

- ".........PRABRVAM SHARADAH SHAT MADEENAM SHYAM SHARADAH SHATAM BHOOYASHCH SHARADAH SHATAT" Please feel not otherwise. I think Shri Avinash Sathaye is appreciably correct. Thanks. Aum

Sham! Darshaney

Lokesh

--- On Tue, 26/5/09, Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved@. ..> wrote:WAVES-Vedic, Avinash Sathaye <sohum@> wrote:After watching a long exchange between Sunil Bhattacharya (SB) and Avatar Krishna Kaul(AKK),I finally found something I can look into: an explicit reference to the rAshis in RV.The reference from SB was:) Vrshabha Rashi in Rig Veda (8.93.1). There are more Rashis in Rig Veda.2) Meena Rashi in Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha (Verse No. 5)3) Brahma Rashi in the Mahabharata had Abhijit Nakshatra. At that time the 28 Nakshatras were considered including Abhijt. Later on the Abhijit is dropped and 27 Nakshatras were counted and the Rashi containing Abhijit became the Makar Rashi.Any knowledgeable astrologer should know the earlier location

of the Abhijit in the ecliptic.I checked the first reference and found the following:The padapATha form in 8.93.1 gives (using ITRANS notation):ut | gha | it | abhi | shruta.amabham | vRRiShabham | narya.aapasam | astAram | eShi | sUryam || 1 ||sAyaNa seems to say that sUkta refers to Indra and says:" indro.api sUryAtmanA paThitaH " - Indra is counted among the 12 Suns.His translation gives no hint that a rAshi is involved here, he consider "bull" as a symbol of wealth.Here is his paraphrase transformed in English with Sanskrit in parenthesis:the best known form of wealth (shrutamagham sarvathA deyatvena vikhyAtadhanam ata ), thus the Bull, (vRRiShabham ) - showering on the people requesting (yAchamAnAnAm dhanasya varShitAram ), bes tower of beneficial things (narya.aapasam)etc.I don't see any reasonable way to interpret the vRRiShabha as a rAshi.If there is a different

explanation, please enlighten us.I tried to check the second reference. I could not find it.I possess a handwritten transcript of the text from the Chaukhamba book called yajuHshAstrIya jyotiSha and it contains 44 verses.The one numbered 5 ismAghashuklaprapanna sya pauShakRRiShNa samApinaH |yugasya pa~nchavarShasya kAlaj~nAnaM prachakShate ||I did not find the "Meena" rAshi yet.Somebody please give the verse and a convincing translation, unless it is clear.I do not possess the whole book, but if there is a convincing reference in it, I can get the relevant copy.I did not bother with mahabharata, since there is no concrete reference. The reference does not even claim that Makara rAshi is mentioned there, but only stipulates that any "knowledgeable astrologer" should know the earliest location of Abhijit.Since the references are to decide the date of introduction of rAshis,

"the knowledge" of an astrologer should be waived as partisan evidence.Now, I partly understand why AKK kept on insisting a reference with a translation( :-))P.S. I have one request for people who engage in long drawn out debates. Often, the messages and counter messages are all kept in the body and the author's response is hard to find. It is also hard to sort out the new arguments from the old.Please, quote only the relevant portions, indicating if you have omitted parts . The interested reader can always go back and review the messages from the past(:-))-- With Best Regards,Avinash SathayeWeb: www.msc.uky. edu/sohum--- End forwarded message ---Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket website. Enter http://beta. cricket.. com--- End forwarded message

---

[Guest guest]

Dear Members,

 

Namaste,

 

I wish to inform Avinash Sathaye, Darshaney Lokesh and Avtar Krishen Kaul

that the Vedic scholars know that the  Veda itself says that the words and

verses in the Veda can  have more than one meaning and in fact the Paroksha

meaning is considered more appropriate than the Pratyaksha meaning. So please do

not misinform the members of the group with your half knowledge. For example

Rigveda says that Pulastya's son Agastya and Vasishtha were born in Kumbha. You

can say that they were born in a pot because Kumbha ordinarily means a pot or

kalash.. But a Vedic scholar will say that they wre born in Kumbha rashi.

 

Secondly why be selective about only one reference. The Rigveda has mentioned

several Rashis and why did any of you not see the other references for the

Rashis in the Veda if you are really interested and consider yourself so expert

in interpreting the Rigvedic verses. The Vedas have the Rashis and that is

irrefutable. Vedanga Jyotisha also says about the Meena and the other Rashis and

I mentioned that earlier. Did that not waken up Avtar Krishen Kaul and his

followers uptil now?

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Fri, 5/29/09, Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved wrote:

 

 

Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved

[VRI] Re: [ind. & West. Astrology] Fwd: Reference for Rashi's in Vedas

vedic_research_institute

Friday, May 29, 2009, 2:23 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Indian_Astrology_ Group_Daily_ Digest@grou ps.com, darshaney lokesh

<darshaneylokesh@ ...> wrote:

 

Dear members, Namastey.

           

           ' UDDHEDABHI SHRUTAMAGHAM VRASHBHAM NARYAMPASAM.

            ASTAARAMESHI SURYA '

 

             In this RICHA the word VRASHABHAM doesnot mean the Vrishabh

Rashi at all. I can also give you its' detailed explanation if desired. In

short, it is just like

talking of Mecca- Madina from the following  referred verse -

 

               " .........PRABRVAM  SHARADAH SHAT   MADEENAM SHYAM SHARADAH

SHATAM  BHOOYASHCH   SHARADAH SHATAT "

 

              Please feel not otherwise. I think Shri Avinash Sathaye is

appreciably correct. 

              Thanks. Aum

Sham!                                                              

                                                                                \

            Darshaney Lokesh            

                                                                                \

                                                                                \

                    

--- On Tue, 26/5/09, Avtar Krishen Kaul <jyotirved@. ..> wrote:

 

WAVES-Vedic, Avinash Sathaye <sohum@> wrote:

 

After watching a long exchange between Sunil Bhattacharya (SB) and

Avatar Krishna Kaul(AKK),

I finally found something I can look into: an explicit reference to the

rAshis in RV.

 

The reference from SB was:

) Vrshabha Rashi in Rig Veda (8.93.1). There are more Rashis in Rig Veda.

 

2) Meena Rashi in Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha (Verse No. 5)

 

3) Brahma Rashi in the Mahabharata had Abhijit Nakshatra. At that time

the 28 Nakshatras were considered including Abhijt. Later on the

Abhijit is dropped and 27 Nakshatras were counted and the Rashi

containing Abhijit became the Makar Rashi.Any knowledgeable astrologer

should know the earlier location of the Abhijit in the ecliptic.

 

I checked the first reference and found the following:

The padapATha form in 8.93.1 gives (using ITRANS notation):

ut | gha | it | abhi | shruta.amabham | vRRiShabham | narya.aapasam |

astAram | eShi | sUryam || 1 ||

sAyaNa seems to say that sUkta refers to Indra and says: " indro.api

sUryAtmanA paThitaH " - Indra is counted among the 12 Suns.

 

His translation gives no hint that a rAshi is involved here, he consider

" bull " as a symbol of wealth.

Here is his paraphrase transformed in English with Sanskrit in parenthesis:

 

the best known form of wealth (shrutamagham sarvathA deyatvena

vikhyAtadhanam ata ), thus the Bull, (vRRiShabham ) - showering on the

people requesting (yAchamAnAnAm dhanasya varShitAram ), bes tower of

beneficial things (narya.aapasam)

etc.

I don't see any reasonable way to interpret the vRRiShabha as a rAshi.

If there is a different explanation, please enlighten us.

 

I tried to check the second reference. I could not find it.

I possess a handwritten transcript of the text from the Chaukhamba book

called yajuHshAstrIya jyotiSha and it contains 44 verses.

The one numbered 5 is

mAghashuklaprapanna sya pauShakRRiShNa samApinaH |

yugasya pa~nchavarShasya kAlaj~nAnaM prachakShate ||

 

I did not find the " Meena " rAshi yet.

Somebody please give the verse and a convincing translation, unless it

is clear.

I do not possess the whole book, but if there is a convincing reference

in it, I can get the relevant copy.

 

I did not bother with mahabharata, since there is no concrete reference.

The reference does not even claim that Makara rAshi is mentioned there,

but only stipulates that any " knowledgeable astrologer " should know the

earliest location of Abhijit.

Since the references are to decide the date of introduction of rAshis,

" the knowledge " of an astrologer should be waived as partisan evidence.

 

Now, I partly understand why AKK kept on insisting a reference with a

translation( :-))

 

P.S. I have one request for people who engage in long drawn out debates.

Often, the messages and counter messages are all kept in the body and

the author's response is hard to find. It is also hard to sort out the

new arguments from the old.Please, quote only the relevant portions,

indicating if you have omitted parts . The interested reader can always

go back and review the messages from the past(:-))

 

--

 

With Best Regards,

Avinash Sathaye

 

Web: www.msc.uky. edu/sohum

 

--- End forwarded message ---

 

Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket website. Enter http://beta.

cricket.. com

 

--- End forwarded message ---