Fw: [Ind-Arch] Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and nothing but spurious?

[Guest guest]

--- On Sat, 8/29/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

 

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

Re: [ind-Arch] Re: Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and

nothing but spurious?

IndiaArchaeology

Saturday, August 29, 2009, 5:43 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr. Kaul,

 

Who is this Astro-Vedas, who wants to hide behind the pseudonym of " Astro-Vedas "

and yet try to distort the authentic name of SKB.  By any chance is it your own

another name or is it of Prashant pandey, who also opearte under pseudonyms. It

does not matter if he does not have a decent name but he has to declare it if

his opinion is to be given any value at all in a scholarly forum. Whoever is

this man he must have guts to come forward and declare his own name before he

can be trusted by the intelligentsia of this group, particularly when he is

disroting other's genuine names. I am sure the honorable members will condemn

such  heinous practice of shadow-bixing. By giving importance to a shadow-boxer

by forwarding his mail just because his opinion supports yours, you are

tarnishing your own image too. Are you aware of that Mr. Kaul?  

 

Now coming to his mail, Mr. Kaul, please ask him to give the specifics as to

which abuses to Veda spirit, is he referring to? Please also ask this man as to

why he ignores that the Puranas (ie. the fifth Veda) mention the Rashis, even if

he  he wants to ignore the mention of Vrishabha and other Rashis in the Veda as

pointed out by Dr. N.R.Waradpande, Dr. Vartak and myself. Dr. Waradpande and Dr.

Vartak has better credentials than this hidden person.

 

This man further talks about Ptolemy and Hipparchus but ask him to tell if he

knows how and where Ptolemy identified the positioning of Aldebaran? His another

worthless argument is that the Rashi should have been mentioned in the other

verses of Vedanga Jyotisha too but he is ignoring that in the short treatise of

Vedanga Jyotisha the author  cannot afford to spill Rashi where it is not

necessary and the author did mention Rashi,  where it was actually required.  

 

This unknown man says that the twelve divisions are seasonal and not

astronomical, ie. not related to the location of the Nakshatras and the Rashis

(ie. the Nakshatras-formations), of the ecliptic. Please get his justification

for that statement, Mr. Kaul.

 

Sincerely,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Sat, 8/29/09, a_krishen <jyotirved wrote:

 

 

a_krishen <jyotirved

[ind-Arch] Re: Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and nothing

but spurious?

indiaarchaeology

Saturday, August 29, 2009, 12:49 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Astro.Vedas@ @ wrote:

 

Again abuses from SKB to VEDAS spirit, those should be deplored and

denounced.Such fellows dont want that we should revive VEDAS again.We should

revive our own civilization and should start celebrating festivals according to

Vedic Calendar which have no Rashis and based on seasons as evident from VEDAS -

Verses.

 

< I have mentioned earlier that according to Kuppanna Sastry the Rashi-verse

appears in all the seven manuscripts seen by him. Some scholars have assumed

that the Rashi-verse is interpolated as Kupanna Sastry himself mentioned about

the belief that the Indians learnt Astrology from the Greeks and hence according

to him any mention of Rashi could not have been there in the Vedanga Jyotisha.

 

Rashi-verse is not out of context in the Veda. I have already shown that Rashis

have been mentioned in the Veda, Vedanga jyotisha as well as in the Puranas (the

fifth veda). >

 

In VEDAS and Brahmnas there is talk of NKS and those NKS are groups of stars

around one specific star.

 

When somebody is having already one nomenclature related to Group of asterism ie

NKS then why he will follow other system ie of constellation( which is related

to RSHIS) like Aries, Taurus etc etc at the same time...

 

Anybody may read Ptolmey's or Hipparchus work, they have talked of the same ie

about constellations Aries, Taurus etc etc.... Babylonian were also using the

same constellations if we put aside some exceptions, even they were using 36

constellations in ancient times  which were called as decante around ecliptic

just to get the location of Sun and Moon.When Alexender attacked all around then

Greeks Zodiac was exported to many countries.

 

From the verses of VJ, it is clear that it is much older work ie around of 1500

BCE, but some ppl(Like Fraudia SKB, though his real name is Sunil Baitullah

Mahsood)introduced spurious verse of Rashis deliberately and all scholars have

said that, that verse is against the Vedic spirit.

 

If Rashis would have been known that time then all other verses related to

astronomy in VJ should have used Rashis nomenclature in other verses also.

 

Anybody may see clear-cut history of developememnt of Rashis from Greek's,

Mesopotamian and Egyptian's civilizations textual and

archaeological evidences.

 

God knows, what funny thing this man and Sreenad are talking.Why they want to

desectrate VEDAS, BRAHMNAS, why they want that our VEDAS are just of 2000 yrs

old.Though there are no evidences of any Rashis ie of any constellations in

VEDAS.

 

< To my mind the Rashis, which recognised the shapes of the Nakshatra-formation

s within the rashi was essential for

identifying the positions of the grahas of the Solar system at any time in terms

of the Nakshatra and Rashi. >

 

Keep aside your funny imagination, when somebody is already having one system of

recognizing stars in groups ie NKS then why he will adopt other one ie of

Rashis.

 

Yes there is no doubt somebody tried to club those ie Rashis and NKS,or one may

say somebody tried to club two civilizations ideas related to astronomy just to

have one system and that magic was done by MAYA.

 

< Thus the concept of the Rashis is as old as the ancient Indian Astronomy. >

 

Yes those are very old creativities and evidences are with us and anybody may

verify it from the archaeological evidences found from the site where

Babylonian  civilization, Mesopotamian civilizations, Greek's civilization were

living.And they have

very sound history of developement like we have of NKS.

 

< The twelve divisions of ecliptic mentioned in the Rig veda cannot be anything

other the Rashis. >

 

Those are seasons according to Sun's movement and they have names like Madhu,

Madhav not of Rashis.And those months are seasonal,go and read. But you made

funny comment that " twelve divisions of ecliptic mentioned in the Rig veda

cannot be anything other the Rashis. " But you say that your Rashis are sidereal

means those have no connections with seasons but about the 12 sections which you

are talking are basically related to seasons. Read some verses from VEDAS which

you ignore and abuse to VEDAS.

 

Jai Hindu, Jai Hindu VEDA

Bharat Mata Ki Jai

Astro.Vedas

 

P.S.:-  I could not stop myself from wrtting this mail as he and Sreenad both

are attacking VEDAS means our ancestors.

 

--- On Fri, 8/28/09, AKKaul <AKKaul wrote:

 

AKKaul <AKKaul

[ind. & West. Astrology] Fw: Re: Fwd: Re: [VRI] Vedanga Jyotisha--Is

Rashi mantra spurious and nothing but spurious?

indian_astrology_ group_daily_ digest@grou ps.com

Friday, August 28, 2009, 7:31 AM

 

 

 

vedic_research_ institute, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

 

--- On Tue, 8/25/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a

Re: Fwd: Re: [VRI] Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and

nothing but spurious?

vedic_research_ institue

Cc: vedic astrology, ancient_indian_ astrology@ .

com, , WAVES-Vedic,

USBrahmins@gro ups.com, indiaarchaeology

Tuesday, August 25, 2009, 6:02 PM

 

Dear friends,

 

I have not sent any query to Shri Harimalla or nor to Shri Samodacharya nor I

have any intention to humiliate respected Dr. Shivaraj Kaundinyayan. Yet I have

to reply to Shri Harimalla as he had sent the mail to me. I think this

discussion will be of interest to you too.

 

I have mentioned earlier that according to Kuppanna Sastry the Rashi-verse

appears in all the seven manuscripts seen by him. Some scholars have assumed

that the Rashi-verse is interpolated as Kupanna Sastry himself mentioned about

the belief that the Indians learnt Astrology from the Greeks and hence according

to him any mention of Rashi could not have been there in the Vedanga Jyotisha.

 

Rashi-verse is not out of context in the Veda. I have already shown that Rashis

have been mentioned in the Veda, Vedanga jyotisha as well as in the Puranas (the

fifth veda). Even from the common sense point of view the Rashi-concept is as

old as the ancient Indian astronomy as otherwise that in the wide open sky how

could the ancient astronomers have identified the individual Nakshatra

positions? Even though the Orion is the brightest of the stars I have not found

any mention anywhere in any of the ancient texts about the use of any star-light

measuring nequipment like the  light-meters  or fkux-meters, in the olden times

to measure the brightness of the stars and to have the comparative figures of

brightness of the stars to make them distinguishable. To my mind the Rashis,

which recognised the shapes of the Nakshatra-formation s within the rashi was

essential for identifying the positions of the grahas of the Solar system at any

time in terms of

the Nakshatra and Rashi. Thus the concept of the Rashis is as old as the ancient

Indian Astronomy. The twelve divisions of ecliptic mentioned in the Rig veda

cannot be anything other the Rashis.

 

The Rashi-verse in the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha Y-VJ) mentions how from the

position of Jupiter in any year one can count the number of the remaining years

in the Yuga. This is a very valid point as without that how can anyone know from

when the Yuga cycle starts? The five-year yuga cycle cannot start every year. It

has to start once in five years and that is how this verse is related to the

Yuga cycle. In his commentary on Taittiriya Brahmana the great Sayanacharya

talks about the 60- year cycle as consisting of twelve of the five year yuga

cycles. Every year of this yuga cycles have specific names. This shows that

without the Rashi-verse the Y-VJ is incomplete. Even Kuppanna Sastri admits the

usefulness of the Rashi-verse. .

 

Now coming to Shri Samodacharya' s brushing aside the commentary of Sudhakar

Dvivedi as that of a modern writer nothing can be further from the truth.

Sudhakar dvivedin wrole his commentary more than hundred years ago and he is not

one of the modern writers like Dr. Shivaraj Kaundinyayan. Where did Sudhakar

Dvivedi say that Rashi-verse is prakshipta? His (Sudhakar Dvivedin's) family 

owned the oldest manuscript of the Vedanga Jyotisha, dated 1526 CE. (Tiubingen

document).

 

Further you will be surprised Somakara refers to Veda (Satapatha Brahmana) to

say that the Veda had mentioned that the yuga started from the fullmoon night.

Thus the  Yuga of the Vedanga Jyotisha started from the first day of the Magha

(Purnimata) and in those days the seasonal month Tapa starting from the

Shukla-pratipada fell within that month.  People like Shri Kaul are wrongly

insisting that the year started from the Tapa. Tapa will fall in whichever month

the Winter Solstice occurs. In the times of Vedanga Jyotisha the Winter Solstice

occurred in the month of Magha (Purnimanta) . Even in the Mahabharata, the dying

man Bhishma waited for the Winter Solstice to occur in Magha and  Tapa was not

mentioned there (because it was not necessary to mention Tapa as it is  always

associated with Winter Solstice). The Winter Solstice would not occur in Magha

for ever.

 

Regards,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

parvasudhar2065, " harimalla@ " <harimalla@> wrote:

 

Dear Samodacharyaji,

Thank you for your reply to shri Bhattacharjyaji' s quories.I will get back to

after receiving the reaction to the said reply.

Please convey my regards to guru Shivaraj Acharyaji. thanks,

Hari Malla

 

parvasudhar2065, " samodacharya " <svadhyaya@> wrote:

>

 

> The RASHI-SHLOKA found in later manuscri¬pts of VEDANGA JYOTISHA is spurious.

It is out of Vedic context. To understand this matter fully you may go through

the ACHARYA KAUNDINNYA¬YANA' S introduction to VEDANGA JYOTISHA, Chaukhamba

Vidyabhavan 2005. The old commentator SOMAKAR has not mentioned the

RASHI-SHLOKA. Modern commentators like SUDHAKAR DVIVEDI etc. also accept that

the RASHI-SHLOKA is PRAKSHIPTA.

> Being just a concluding remark there was no need to comment separately on the

43rd SHLOKA of VEDANGA JYOTISHA. SOMAKARA has included it in the commentary of

44rth SHLOKA.   SUDHA¬KARA DVIVEDI was not able to understand SOMA¬KARA'S

commentary. ACHARYA KAUNDI¬NNYA¬YANA has elucidated this important conclusion of

SOMAKARA.

 

>

> parvasudhar2065, " harimalla@ " <harimalla@> wrote:

> >

> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjy a@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear friends,

> >  

> > Namaste,

> >  

> > It is nice that Shri Kaul has uploaded the few pages out of the more than

500 pages of Dr. Shivaraj's edition of Somaakara's  commentary on the Yajur

Vedanga Jyotisha (Y-VJ), in his own HinduCalendar group as well as in the Vedic

Research Institute group. But it is regrettable that Shri Kaul did not

highlight Dr. Shivaraj's own comment in page 424 that according to

Sudhakara the verse 43 was not there in the Somakaara's bhashya (and yet he

included that in his edition).

> >  

> > Now coming to the Rashi verse Shri Kaul should also quote Dr. Shivaraj as to

why he (Dr. Shicaraj) omitted that from his book even though he added one verse

(as shown above), which was not there in Somakara's bhashya.. This is important

as in the edition of Kupanna Sastry it is mentioned in page 31 that the Rashi

verse was there in all the seven manuscripts, which he consulted.

> >  

> > In his eagerness to show that Rashis were imported from the Greeks Shri Kaul

should not act with bias.

> >  

> > Moreover why should Shri Kaul single me out as Parokshya professor.

Parokshya jnana is nothing but logical inference. For example, we see that the

Sun rises in the east and sets in the west and that this movement of the Sun

round the Earth is Pratyaksha jnana. But we with the Paroksha jnana know that in

reality the Earth moves round the Sun and not the reverse. All people with

brains are Parokshya jnanis. Why does Shri Kaul not think of himself as one of

the Parokshya jnanis?

> >  

> > Regards,

> >  

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> >  

> >  

> >  

> >

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- End forwarded message ---

 

--- End forwarded message ---

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

start: 0000-00-00 end: 0000-00-00

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- On Sat, 8/29/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: [ind-Arch] Re: Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and nothing but spurious?IndiaArchaeology Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 5:43 PM

 

 

 

 

 

Mr. Kaul,

 

Who is this Astro-Vedas, who wants to hide behind the pseudonym of "Astro-Vedas" and yet try to distort the authentic name of SKB. By any chance is it your own another name or is it of Prashant pandey, who also opearte under pseudonyms. It does not matter if he does not have a decent name but he has to declare it if his opinion is to be given any value at all in a scholarly forum. Whoever is this man he must have guts to come forward and declare his own name before he can be trusted by the intelligentsia of this group, particularly when he is disroting other's genuine names. I am sure the honorable members will condemn such heinous practice of shadow-bixing. By giving importance to a shadow-boxer by forwarding his mail just because his opinion supports yours, you are tarnishing your own image too. Are you aware of that Mr. Kaul?

 

Now coming to his mail, Mr. Kaul, please ask him to give the specifics as to which abuses to Veda spirit, is he referring to? Please also ask this man as to why he ignores that the Puranas (ie. the fifth Veda) mention the Rashis, even if he he wants to ignore the mention of Vrishabha and other Rashis in the Veda as pointed out by Dr. N.R.Waradpande, Dr. Vartak and myself. Dr. Waradpande and Dr. Vartak has better credentials than this hidden person.

 

This man further talks about Ptolemy and Hipparchus but ask him to tell if he knows how and where Ptolemy identified the positioning of Aldebaran? His another worthless argument is that the Rashi should have been mentioned in the other verses of Vedanga Jyotisha too but he is ignoring that in the short treatise of Vedanga Jyotisha the author cannot afford to spill Rashi where it is not necessary and the author did mention Rashi, where it was actually required.

 

This unknown man says that the twelve divisions are seasonal and not astronomical, ie. not related to the location of the Nakshatras and the Rashis (ie. the Nakshatras-formations), of the ecliptic. Please get his justification for that statement, Mr. Kaul.

 

Sincerely,

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Sat, 8/29/09, a_krishen <jyotirved wrote:

a_krishen <jyotirved[ind-Arch] Re: Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and nothing but spurious?indiaarchaeology Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 12:49 AM

 

 

Astro.Vedas@ @ wrote:Again abuses from SKB to VEDAS spirit, those should be deplored and denounced.Such fellows dont want that we should revive VEDAS again.We should revive our own civilization and should start celebrating festivals according to Vedic Calendar which have no Rashis and based on seasons as evident from VEDAS - Verses. < I have mentioned earlier that according to Kuppanna Sastry the Rashi-verseappears in all the seven manuscripts seen by him. Some scholars have assumedthat the Rashi-verse is interpolated as Kupanna Sastry himself mentioned aboutthe belief that the Indians learnt Astrology from the Greeks and hence accordingto him any mention of Rashi could not have been there in the Vedanga Jyotisha. Rashi-verse is not out of context in the Veda. I have already shown that Rashishave been mentioned in the Veda, Vedanga jyotisha as well as in the Puranas (thefifth veda).

> In VEDAS and Brahmnas there is talk of NKS and those NKS are groups of stars around one specific star. When somebody is having already one nomenclature related to Group of asterism ie NKS then why he will follow other system ie of constellation( which is related to RSHIS) like Aries, Taurus etc etc at the same time... Anybody may read Ptolmey's or Hipparchus work, they have talked of the same ie about constellations Aries, Taurus etc etc.... Babylonian were also using the same constellations if we put aside some exceptions, even they were using 36 constellations in ancient times which were called as decante around ecliptic just to get the location of Sun and Moon.When Alexender attacked all around then Greeks Zodiac was exported to many countries. From the verses of VJ, it is clear that it is much older work ie around of 1500 BCE, but some ppl(Like Fraudia SKB, though his real name is Sunil

Baitullah Mahsood)introduced spurious verse of Rashis deliberately and all scholars have said that, that verse is against the Vedic spirit. If Rashis would have been known that time then all other verses related toastronomy in VJ should have used Rashis nomenclature in other verses also. Anybody may see clear-cut history of developememnt of Rashis from Greek's, Mesopotamian and Egyptian's civilizations textual andarchaeological evidences. God knows, what funny thing this man and Sreenad are talking.Why they want to desectrate VEDAS, BRAHMNAS, why they want that our VEDAS are just of 2000 yrs old.Though there are no evidences of any Rashis ie of any constellations in VEDAS. < To my mind the Rashis, which recognised the shapes of the Nakshatra-formation s within the rashi was essential foridentifying the positions of the grahas of the Solar system at any time in terms of the Nakshatra and

Rashi. > Keep aside your funny imagination, when somebody is already having one system of recognizing stars in groups ie NKS then why he will adopt other one ie of Rashis. Yes there is no doubt somebody tried to club those ie Rashis and NKS,or one may say somebody tried to club two civilizations ideas related to astronomy just to have one system and that magic was done by MAYA. < Thus the concept of the Rashis is as old as the ancient Indian Astronomy. > Yes those are very old creativities and evidences are with us and anybody may verify it from the archaeological evidences found from the site where Babylonian civilization, Mesopotamian civilizations, Greek's civilization were living.And they havevery sound history of developement like we have of NKS. < The twelve divisions of ecliptic mentioned in the Rig veda cannot be anything other the Rashis.

> Those are seasons according to Sun's movement and they have names like Madhu, Madhav not of Rashis.And those months are seasonal,go and read. But you made funny comment that " twelve divisions of ecliptic mentioned in the Rig veda cannot be anything other the Rashis. " But you say that your Rashis are sidereal means those have no connections with seasons but about the 12 sections which you are talking are basically related to seasons. Read some verses from VEDAS which you ignore and abuse to VEDAS. Jai Hindu, Jai Hindu VEDABharat Mata Ki JaiAstro.Vedas P.S.:- I could not stop myself from wrtting this mail as he and Sreenad both are attacking VEDAS means our ancestors.--- On Fri, 8/28/09, AKKaul <AKKaul wrote:AKKaul <AKKaul[ind. & West. Astrology] Fw: Re: Fwd: Re: [VRI] Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and nothing but

spurious?indian_astrology_ group_daily_ digest@grou ps.comFriday, August 28, 2009, 7:31 AM vedic_research_ institute, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:--- On Tue, 8/25/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy aRe: Fwd: Re: [VRI] Vedanga Jyotisha--Is Rashi mantra spurious and nothing but spurious?vedic_research_ institueCc: vedic astrology, ancient_indian_ astrology, , WAVES-Vedic, USBrahmins@gro ups.com, indiaarchaeologyTuesday, August 25, 2009, 6:02 PMDear

friends, I have not sent any query to Shri Harimalla or nor to Shri Samodacharya nor I have any intention to humiliate respected Dr. Shivaraj Kaundinyayan. Yet I have to reply to Shri Harimalla as he had sent the mail to me. I think this discussion will be of interest to you too. I have mentioned earlier that according to Kuppanna Sastry the Rashi-verse appears in all the seven manuscripts seen by him. Some scholars have assumed that the Rashi-verse is interpolated as Kupanna Sastry himself mentioned about the belief that the Indians learnt Astrology from the Greeks and hence according to him any mention of Rashi could not have been there in the Vedanga Jyotisha. Rashi-verse is not out of context in the Veda. I have already shown that Rashis have been mentioned in the Veda, Vedanga jyotisha as well as in the Puranas (the fifth veda). Even from the common sense point of view the Rashi-concept is

as old as the ancient Indian astronomy as otherwise that in the wide open sky how could the ancient astronomers have identified the individual Nakshatra positions? Even though the Orion is the brightest of the stars I have not found any mention anywhere in any of the ancient texts about the use of any star-light measuring nequipment like the light-meters or fkux-meters, in the olden times to measure the brightness of the stars and to have the comparative figures of brightness of the stars to make them distinguishable. To my mind the Rashis, which recognised the shapes of the Nakshatra-formation s within the rashi was essential for identifying the positions of the grahas of the Solar system at any time in terms ofthe Nakshatra and Rashi. Thus the concept of the Rashis is as old as the ancient Indian Astronomy. The twelve divisions of ecliptic mentioned in the Rig veda cannot be anything other the

Rashis. The Rashi-verse in the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha Y-VJ) mentions how from the position of Jupiter in any year one can count the number of the remaining years in the Yuga. This is a very valid point as without that how can anyone know from when the Yuga cycle starts? The five-year yuga cycle cannot start every year. It has to start once in five years and that is how this verse is related to the Yuga cycle. In his commentary on Taittiriya Brahmana the great Sayanacharya talks about the 60- year cycle as consisting of twelve of the five year yuga cycles. Every year of this yuga cycles have specific names. This shows that without the Rashi-verse the Y-VJ is incomplete. Even Kuppanna Sastri admits the usefulness of the Rashi-verse. . Now coming to Shri Samodacharya' s brushing aside the commentary of Sudhakar Dvivedi as that of a modern writer nothing can be further from the truth. Sudhakar

dvivedin wrole his commentary more than hundred years ago and he is not one of the modern writers like Dr. Shivaraj Kaundinyayan. Where did Sudhakar Dvivedi say that Rashi-verse is prakshipta? His (Sudhakar Dvivedin's) family owned the oldest manuscript of the Vedanga Jyotisha, dated 1526 CE. (Tiubingen document). Further you will be surprised Somakara refers to Veda (Satapatha Brahmana) to say that the Veda had mentioned that the yuga started from the fullmoon night. Thus the Yuga of the Vedanga Jyotisha started from the first day of the Magha (Purnimata) and in those days the seasonal month Tapa starting from the Shukla-pratipada fell within that month. People like Shri Kaul are wrongly insisting that the year started from the Tapa. Tapa will fall in whichever month the Winter Solstice occurs. In the times of Vedanga Jyotisha the Winter Solstice occurred in the month of

Magha (Purnimanta) . Even in the Mahabharata, the dying man Bhishma waited for the Winter Solstice to occur in Magha and Tapa was not mentioned there (because it was not necessary to mention Tapa as it is always associated with Winter Solstice). The Winter Solstice would not occur in Magha for ever. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya parvasudhar2065, "harimalla@" <harimalla@> wrote:Dear Samodacharyaji,Thank you for your reply to shri Bhattacharjyaji' s quories.I will get back to after receiving the reaction to the said reply.Please convey my regards to guru Shivaraj Acharyaji. thanks,Hari Mallaparvasudhar2065, "samodacharya" <svadhyaya@> wrote:>> The RASHI-SHLOKA found in later manuscri¬pts of VEDANGA JYOTISHA is spurious. It is out of Vedic context. To understand this

matter fully you may go through the ACHARYA KAUNDINNYA¬YANA' S introduction to VEDANGA JYOTISHA, Chaukhamba Vidyabhavan 2005. The old commentator SOMAKAR has not mentioned the RASHI-SHLOKA. Modern commentators like SUDHAKAR DVIVEDI etc. also accept that the RASHI-SHLOKA is PRAKSHIPTA.> Being just a concluding remark there was no need to comment separately on the 43rd SHLOKA of VEDANGA JYOTISHA. SOMAKARA has included it in the commentary of 44rth SHLOKA. SUDHA¬KARA DVIVEDI was not able to understand SOMA¬KARA'S commentary. ACHARYA KAUNDI¬NNYA¬YANA has elucidated this important conclusion of SOMAKARA.>> parvasudhar2065, "harimalla@" <harimalla@> wrote:> >> > , Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a@> wrote:> >> > Dear friends,> > Â > > Namaste,> >

 > > It is nice that Shri Kaul has uploaded the few pages out of the more than 500 pages of Dr. Shivaraj's edition of Somaakara's commentary on the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha (Y-VJ), in his own HinduCalendar group as well as in the Vedic Research Institute group. But it is regrettable that Shri Kaul did not highlight Dr. Shivaraj's own comment in page 424 that according to Sudhakara the verse 43 was not there in the Somakaara's bhashya (and yet he included that in his edition).> >  > > Now coming to the Rashi verse Shri Kaul should also quote Dr. Shivaraj as to why he (Dr. Shicaraj) omitted that from his book even though he added one verse (as shown above), which was not there in Somakara's bhashya.. This is important as in the edition of Kupanna Sastry it is mentioned in page 31 that the Rashi verse was there in all the seven manuscripts,

which he consulted.> >  > > In his eagerness to show that Rashis were imported from the Greeks Shri Kaul should not act with bias.> >  > > Moreover why should Shri Kaul single me out as Parokshya professor. Parokshya jnana is nothing but logical inference. For example, we see that the Sun rises in the east and sets in the west and that this movement of the Sun round the Earth is Pratyaksha jnana. But we with the Paroksha jnana know that in reality the Earth moves round the Sun and not the reverse. All people with brains are Parokshya jnanis. Why does Shri Kaul not think of himself as one of the Parokshya jnanis?> >  > > Regards,> >  > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> >  > >  > >  > > --- End forwarded message

------ End forwarded message ---start: 0000-00-00 end: 0000-00-00

start: 0000-00-00

end: 0000-00-00