References_Rashis_Vedaas_Vedanga_Jyotisha

[Guest guest]

--- On Sun, 6/14/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: [WAVES-Vedic] Re: [Abhinavagupta] References of Rashis in the Vedaas and the Vedanga Jyotisha?"Ujjagar Singh Wassan" <uswassanSunday, June 14, 2009, 3:30 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Shri Wassanji,

 

Namaste,

 

This is a very good proposal from you. I am glad that you have taken some initiative on this. May be you can give a proposal to the WAVES Board and WAVES can organise a seminar / conference on this theme in India or elsewhere. I think India will be better as most of the scholars on Jyotish are in India. Moreover several universities in India has Jyotish courses. Rashis are Nirayana and they are linked to the fixed nakshatras. In the Vamana purana Pulastya very clearly tells that to Narada. But some half-baked anti-Hindu scholars are insisting that ther Rashis are of Tropical Zodiac. They wish to destroy the the vedic iterature.

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjyangh Wassan <uswassan wrote:

Ujjagar Singh Wassan <uswassanRe: [WAVES-Vedic] Re: [Abhinavagupta] References of Rashis in the Vedaas and the Vedanga Jyotisha?Abhinavagupta , "Sunil Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjyaCc: , , vedic astrology , vedic_research_institute , indiaarchaeology , , USBrahmins , waves-vedic Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 9:02 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Veda Interested Audience

May be somebody should compile all the contemporary comments and have a discussion at meeting. It is too important a topic to let it go waste. Interested please cooperate. Best wishes.

Ujjagar Singh Wassan--- On Thu, 6/11/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya[WAVES-Vedic] Re: [Abhinavagupta] References of Rashis in the Vedaas and the Vedanga Jyotisha?Abhinavagupta Cc: , , vedic astrology , vedic_research_institute , indiaarchaeology , , USBrahmins , waves-vedic Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 1:37 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear friends,

 

The Rashis are mentioned in the Vedas and Vedanga Jyotisha as shown in my earlier mail. Rashis are also given in the Bhagavata Purana. As the Vedic verses are cryptic in nature everybody may not be able to understand these verses and this was deliberately made so such that anybody wihout proper education and training should not be able to understand all the meanings of the verses. One may not be able to understand that the names such as Vrshava and Kumbha, mentioned in the Veda are the names of the Rashis. Though Agastya was born from the womb of Havirbhoo in the Kumbha rashi one can still contest this and say that as Kumbha means a pitcher, and therefore Agastya must have been born in a pitcher and not in the womb of Havirbhoo. But no such problem exists in the Bhagavata Purana, where the Rashis are very clearly mentioned and all those persons, who want to prove that Hindus did

not know about Rashi till the Greeks taught them, always carefully avoid making any reference to the Bhagavata purana, which is a shastra, which is considered the essence of the Veda and Vedanta.by the Hindus. It was recited to Parikshita, the grandson of Arjuna in the 31st century BCE. Puranas are called the Fifth Veda by the upanishads. The enemies of Hinduism want to prove that the Rashis are not in the Vedic literature either by hook or by crook.

 

It is evident that the scholars like S.B.Dixit, T.S.Kupunna Sastry, Meghnad Saha, S.K.Chatterjee and A.K. Bag had unfortunately not read the Bhagavata purana and the Vedas and therefore they have not seen the references to the Rashis in these texts. Their knowledge of the ancient Indian chronology was also limited to that of the Max Mullerian chronology. S.B.Dixit had collected all the works on Hindu Jyotisha throughout the country for preparing his magnum-opus and can you believe that he did not mention about the great work of Chandrasekhara Simha Samanta of the 19th century CE. Just by saying that S.B.Dixit cound not find the Rashis in Veda one cannot wish away the Rashis from the ancient Hindu texts. Just because they trusted what David Pingree said about the import of rashi from Babylonia, the Hindus cannot ignore the evidence of their own Bhagavata Purana and the Vedas. Some of these anti-Hindu activists would even

call a verse given in the Vedanga Jyotisha as interpolated so that they get support for their theory of import of Rashi from the Greek sources and Babylonia. It does not occur to these people that being influenced by Pingree and others somebody could have tried to replace the verse by another verse and instead of removing it from the text altogether it was kept alongside the text.

 

According to the Suryasiddhanta the composer Maya got the knowledge of Jyotisha from Vivasvat at the end of the Satya yuga ie. in the beginning of the Treta yuga ie. around 9000 BCE. Vivasvat was the father of Vaivasvat Manu, the first Law-giver.

 

The Rashis are there in the Veda the Bhagavata purana. The latter mentions them in a much clearer way so that even a layman can know tha Rashis are there in the ancient Hindu texts written 5,000 years ago.

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Wed, 6/10/09, Avtar <Avtar > wrote:

Avtar <Avtar >[Abhinavagupta] References of Rashis in the Vedaas and the Vedanga Jyotisha?"jyotirved" <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com>Wednesday, June 10, 2009, 12:37 PM

 

 

 

 

Dear friends,

Namaskar!

 

 

 

The Samhitopanishad Brahman 3/1-11 has said:

 

“vidya vai brahmanam ajagama tavaham asmi, tvam mam palayasva, anarhate manine maa daa, gopaya maa shreyaseete aham asmi, vidyaya-sardham mriyet na vidyam ushare vapet†“Knowledge (personified) went to the Brahmin and implored him, ‘I am yours. Take care of me and protect me. Do not give me to someone who does not deserve me. Keep me hidden from them. I am your wealth in every respect’. The knowledgeable Brahmin should die with the knowledge but not sow it in a barren land†The Manusmriti 2/114 also has said

“Brahma yastu an-anujnyatam adheeyanad avapnuyat, Sa brahma steya samyukto narakam pratipadyete†i.e. “Anyone studying the Vedas without proper permission is a thief of the Vedasâ€. The Vedic texts were held very sacred in ancient times. They are supposed to be “the breath of the Eternal†and are not supposed to be revealed to anybody who does not deserve such knowledge. It may sound a bit chauvinistic, but I can see as to why our ancestors were dead against bestowing Vedic knowledge on every Tom, Dick and Harry! The most glaring case is the deleterious consequences of every “Vedic astrologer†having the cunning to interpret (actually misinterpret! ) the mantras anyway he/she wants to just to prove that the real Vamadevas were astro-buffs who would make predictions by dint of inanimate objects like Mangal, Shani and even non-existent lunar nodes viz. Rahu and Kethu, on the basis of an imaginary “belt of animals†known as zodiac! Ironically, however, we have also very few real Vedic scholars around and the ones that are there, do not want to castigate “Vedic astrologers†for such misinterpretations! I do not know whether it is cowardice of those scholars or something else. Of late a new bee has entered the bonnet of “Vedic astrologersâ€. They are making a lot of noise about Mina etc. rashi in the “Yajur Vedanga Jyotisham†(sic!) by Acharya Lagadha! Similarly, it is being said that there are Mesha, Vrisha etc. astrological signs in the Rig-Veda.

In support of their stand that there is Mina Rashis in the VJ, they are quoting a mantra said to be the fifth mantra of “Yajurvedanga Jyotisha†(sic!), reading as “ye brihaspatina bhukta minatprabriti rashayah, te hrita panchabir yata yah sheshah sa parigrahahâ€. Let us see the facts and also the pernicious effects of such stands of “Vedic astrologersâ€: 1. S. B. Dikshit has discussed the Vedanga Jyotisham in its entirety in his magnum opus “History of Indian astronomyâ€. He has not referred to any such mantra anywhere. On the other hand, he has said emphatically on page 96, of Part-I “It (the Vedanga Jyotisham) does not mention any Rashis (signs) nor was there a system of stating the planet’s place with respect to 12 divisions of the ecliptic. The position of the sun and moon (alone) are given with respect to nakshatrasâ€. 2. Dikshit has reiterated the same thing on page 139 of the same work: “There is no doubt that these terms (Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis) came into vogue at a time when Vernal Equinox was in Ashvini nakshatra and Mesha Rashi simultaneously…and the Mahabharata does not contain any reference about Mesha etc. terms. Hence it can be safely inferred that these terms were unknown in our country before 500 BS (before Shaka Era i.e. till about 5th century BCE)â€. He has concluded the same thing on page 147 in the following words, “The names of Rashis, Mesha and others, came into vogue at about 500 BS (before Shaka Era). The names of weekdays came into use before them, and (both)

have been borrowed from foreign countriesâ€. 3. T. S. Kuppanna Sastry, Hony Prof., Sanskrit College, Madras, has said on page 353 of his “Collected Papers on Jyotisha†(Kendriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Tirupati)—“Historians and scholars agree that at such an early age as 509 BC, weekdays like Sunday, names of Rashis like Mesha, and ideas like exaltation, and giving numbers in bhuytasankhya were not in use among Indiansâ€. The same author has said further on page 452 of the same work, “The names of weekdays like Ravi-vasara, Indu-Vasara etc. and the names of twelve signs composing the zodiac like Mesha, Rishaba etc. occur for the first time now (much later than 509 BCE). These originated in Babylonia and reached India via the

Greeksâ€. On page 454 T.S.K.S. has castigated “Vedic astrologers†in the following words, “A host of astrological works, many of them claiming Greeks as their Purvacharyas, seem to have been written in this period, followed later by Hindu authors with zest. It is for this concoction, this bane of our culture, i.e. astrology, that we are indebted to the Greeks in a large measureâ€. 4. Dr. Meghnad Saha, a doyen among scientists, who was also the Chairman of the Calendar Reform Committee in 1955, has said on page 193 of “Report of the (Saha) Calendar Reform Committeeâ€, a masterpiece document throwing a flood of light on ancient Hindu astronomy/astrology vis-à-vis the Greeks, “It is thus seen that the names of the zodiacal signs (by Varahamhira) are originally of Babylonian origin. They were taken over almost without change by the Greeks, and subsequently by the Romans, and the Hindus, from Graeco-Chaldean astrology….These signs were taken up by almost all nations in centuries before the Christian era on account of the significance attached to them by astrologers. In

Greece they were first supposed to have been introduced by the early Greek astronomer Cleostratos, an astronomer who observed about 532 BC in the island of Tenedos off the Hellespont who introduced designation ‘Zodiac’ to describe the belt of stars about the ecliptic. The twelve ‘Zodiacal signs’ are not known in older ritualistic Indian literature like the Brahmanas. They have come to India in the wake of the Macedonian Greeks or of nations like the Sakas who were intermediaries for transmission of Greek culture to Indiaâ€. 5. On page 278 of “History of Astronomy in Indiaâ€, (INSA), Commodore S. K. Chattterjee has said, “The Babylonian and the Greeks had a similar set of names for the Rashis, and in the same order, and Varahamihira adopted the corrupted Greek names for naming the Rashi division. Rashi in the present form is not specifically mentioned in early ritualistic literature like Brahmanas or in the epic like Mahabharata….Specifically naming the divisions of the ecliptic after the name of animals and objects were not in use then in India and this pattern of naming the 12 divisions of the ecliptic came into vogue, like the weekdays, with the rise of Graeco-Chaldean astronomyâ€. 6. On page 102-3 of the same work, Dr. A. K. Bag, Head, History of Science, INSA, New Delhi, has this to say, “In 1959, Pingree reported briefly on a Greek linear planetary text written in Sanskrit, which provided a definite evidence of Babylonian methods and parameters in an astrological context. …..Pingree has given a masterly exposition of various verses (of Sphujidwaja’s Yavanajataka in Sanmskrit) establishing their connection with Greek and Latin astrologers like Antiochus, Atheniensis, Critodemus, Dorotheus, Sidonious, Firmicus---52 names have been given as well as with later Indian astrologers who used this text or its teaching. It has been known for a long time that the twelve

signs of the zodiac were introduced into Indian astronomy through astrological sources of foreign origin….The Egyptians had developed the idea of correlating different signs of the zodiac with specific parts of the human body so as to produce a scheme of zodiacal melothesia. One of this idea originated the erect cosmic man and the theory of microcosm and macrocosm which became widespread in the ancient world. Sphujidwaja’s scheme in which Aries is represented by the head of the human body, Taurus by mouth and neck, Gemini by shoulders and arms, Cancer by chest, Leo by heart, Virgo by belly and so on was derived by Egyptian conceptsâ€. It is actually Egyptian “Kalapurusha (Rashipurusha! )†that has been imported into India thus, via Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis!

7. We find Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis for the first time in the Surya Sidhanta of Panchasidhantika- --a compilation of five sidhantas by Varahamihira. That sidhanta-kara claims to be Maya, who claimed to have got the planetary elements directly from Surya Bhagwan at the fag end of the last Satya Yuga. In other words, that work was revealed to him millions of years back, more than 2,165,000 years back, to be precise, as per the duration of yugas in the same sidhanta! It is practically impossible that any work could have survived for such a long time. Besides, the planetary mean longitudes given in that work have to be calculated on the basis of daily mean motion and that also without any

secular variations! That again is an astronomical impossibility! 8. The planetary longitudes of the SS are monstrous, to say the least! They are not correct for any epoch for any planet either in the past or future. Thus it could not have been the Maya of either Treta-yuga, the father-in-law of Raskhasa king Ravana or of Dwapara-yuga, which itself ended at least five thousand years back as per the same Surya Sidhanta. 9. On the other hand, we hear Vrahamihra saying in his Brihat Jatakam, seventh adhyaya (titled Ayurdaya i.e. longevity), first shloka, “Maya, Yavana, Manitha and Parashara etc. (purvacharyas) have allotted different years of dashas to sun etc. planets for calculating longevityâ€. Varahamihra has thus referred to Maya who is none other than Maya the mlechha of the Surya Sidhanta; Yavana of Varahimihira is none other than Yavanaraja Sphujidwaja or even Minaraja and similarly, Manitha is also another Greek name.

10. It is these very Yavanas whom Varahamihra himself has called mlechhas in his Brihat Samhita, and said further that in spite of being mlechhas, they are worshipped like rishis because they know predictive gimmicks. Maya the mlechha of the Surya Sidhanta was thus a liar who impersonated as an exalted soul of millions of years back. He was, however, literally worshipped till a few decades back in India! Some jyotishis still consider Surya Sidhanta a divine work with the only difference that they think it fit only for predictive gimmicks and not for calculating timings of heliacal rising and setting or eclipses etc! What an irony, since Maya has not said anywhere that only janmapatris are to be made

from his work. On the other hand, there are chapters for calculating the timings of eclipses and heliacal rising and setting etc. in the Surya Sidhanta! 11. It is common knowledge that no astronomical work from any observatory the world over talks even by mistake about any Aries, Taurus etc. twelve equal divisions of the “imaginary belt†called zodiac! These namesakes of constellations are actually absolutely useless and meaningless for any astronomical purpose. The only utility these Mesha etc. rashis have is to make fool of a common man by such fear psychosis as sade-sati and Kalasarpa Dosha and Rahu Dasha and so on, or even Mangalika dosha! 12. And of course, the only other purpose these rashis have served is to derail the original Vedic calendar by making Hindus celebrate all the festivals and muhurtas on wrong days! 13. Now about the much touted mantra of Yajur-Jyotisham supposed to talk about Mina Rashi! This mantra is given on page 50 of “Vedanga Jyotisham†with Hindi commentary by Jyotishacharya Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra, published by a publisher from Darya Ganj, Delhi, 2005 edition. “Vedic astrologers†should heed the words of that commentator on page 11, “The work related to Rigveda is known as Rik Jyotisham and the one related to Yajur Veda is known as Yajur Jyotisham. Rik Jyotisham is considered a highly sacred work and is recited on a day to day basis, whereas there is no such usage in vogue about Yajur Jyotishamâ€. This is what the commentator/ translator has said about this mantra on page 50 (a summary of his

analysis), “It is extremely doubtful that this mantra (showing Mina Rashi in Yajur Jyotisham) is a genuine one since it has mentioned Mina Rashi which is an impossibility….During the time of the Vedanga Jyotisha, nakshatas and not Rashis were used. This mantra has not been numbered (which means it is an interpolation) and Somakar (an early commentator of the Vedanga Jyotisham) has not taken this mantra into account. This mantra must have been added by some useless fellow and that is why the calculations result in a very gross result. This mantra is an interpolation by some mentally deranged person after the Jupiterian sixty year cycle had come into vogueâ€. 14. That is exactly what has happened with Narada Purana, where the shlokas of ayanamsha etc. have been interpolated from the Surya Sidhanta, and the Ayanamsha calculated in such a manner as to make it agree with that of Lahiri Ayanamsha, which is actually an impossibility astronomically. The same thing has also happened with Vishnudharmotarapur ana. Astronomical parameters from the Brahma-Sphuta- Sidhanta have been purloined as Pitamaha Sidhanta! Agni Purana is yet another example of simila atrocities! Then in an Upanishada, Puranas and itihasas have been claimed to be the fifth Veda! Which means that that Upanishada itself is a much later work than the Bhagavata etc. 15. Obviously, these "Vedic astrologers" are also oblivious of the fact that by superimposing Rashis on the Vedanga Jyotisham, they are making that work then of post Surya Sidhanta era, since there were no Rashis in India till the advent of the SS, as proved above. And that is what actually David Pingree was trying to prove--that the VJ is a work of about sixth century BCE and has been compiled on the basis of Babylonian influence. According to him! “Vedic astrologers†are thus supporting Pingree not indirectly but openly and directly by superimposing Rashis on that work! All the above proofs are more than sufficient to demolish the theory that predictive gimmicks, based on Mesha, Vrisha etc. rashis through Mangal, Shani etc. planets have been propagated by real Vamadevas! About the mantra “Shravishthabyam gunabyastan pragvilagnan vinirdishetâ€, Dikshit has said on page 79 of History of Indian Astronomy—“This first half is unintelligibleâ€. It is actually impossible to understand the meaning of this mantra as we do not find any mention of “lagnaâ€, yet another astrological term, in any astronomical work or even astrological work of pre-sidhantic era! I must, therefore, repeat it for the umpteenth time that we do not need enemies to ruin our dharma, or even for making the entire world laugh at us, since our "Vedic astrologers" are doing that job in a splendid manner! With regards, A K Kaul PS Comments regarding the misinterpretation of Vedic mantras by “Vedic astrologers†like Vartak and Company will be given separately! AKK