Fw: [VRI] Fw: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is spurious!

October 5, 2009

--- On Mon, 10/5/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

Re: [VRI] Fw: Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha

is spurious!

vedic_research_institute

Monday, October 5, 2009, 2:55 PM

Dear friends,

Kindly see my earlier mail where I made it clear that I have regards for Dixit

yet I have to say that he did not access to the modern research which busted the

Aryan Invasion theory and the Associated chronology and that is why he thought

that the Rashis were imported from the Greeks.

Regards,

sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Mon, 10/5/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote:

Krishen <jyotirved

[VRI] Fw: Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is

spurious!

vedic_research_institute

Monday, October 5, 2009, 1:58 AM

Dear friends,

Jai Shri Ram!

Shri Bhattacharjya has said, " It appears that Dr. Mishra himself may be a good

for nothing person if he is challenging the writer of the Vedanga Jyotisha and

we have also to remember that the famous scholar Kuppanna Shastri also considers

the Rashi verse to be very useful and stated in his book that it is for this

reason the verse is still there. Obviously nobody had deleted it in spite of the

severe onslaught from the people who followed the Max Mullerian chronology,

which was formulated around

1882 CE. "

There was absolutely no need for my friend Shri Bhattacharjya to eat such a long

yarn!

All that Shri Bhattacharjya wants to prove is that except for him and some

" Vedic astrologers " , all the scholars of India like S B Dikshit and Dr.

Kuppanna Shastry and Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra and even Somakar or even Gita

Press translators of the Valmiki Ramayana etc. etc. were/are good for nothing

fellows and were/are influenced by Max Muller's chronology!

Actually, it is the other way round! " Vedic astrologers " are themselves

enveloped in tamoguni budhih and that is why they twist everything the way they

want to! They thus read even dharmashastras upside down!

Example is better than precept! Shri Bhattacharjya has said, " Dr. Mishra

obviously had not read that about the twelve divisions of the ecliptic (or the

Gopath) in the Rig Veda, which automatically means that each division will be

30 degrees. In the Geocentric model it is the road by which the Sun moves round

the earth. "

I am reminded of the tragic fate of Galileo of Galilee, who was made to recant

the Copernicus' Heliocentric theory by the Church there and say, " The earth does

not move round the sun "

The poor Galileo had to mutter silently, " et per se, it moveth " ( " It is

immaterial what I say, all the same, the earth does moves (round the sun) " .

Besides, Shri Bhattacharjya says, " Which automatically means that each division

will be 30 degrees " ! In fact, the journey of the sun/earth is through Vedic

months which are not of " equal divisions " of thirty days (degrees) each! It is

only selfish jyotishis like Bhattacharjya who transmute the months into twelve

equal divisions of the ecliptic!

If the VJ had intended to talk of Mesha etc. Rashis, it would not have felt shy

of listing rashi names like Mesha etc instead of or besieds Tapah, Tapasya and

Magha, Phalguna etc. months!

" Vedic astrologers " like Bhattacharjya want us to believe further that the Vedic

seers had no idea about the movement of the earth and planets round the sun and

believed in the Geocentric system like the Surya Sidhanta by Maya the mlechha!

Thus " Vedic astrologers " are themselves belittling the Vedic seers! Even

if, for the sake of argument we agree that the Vedic seers had no such

knowledge that the solar system was heliocentric and not geocentric, why do

" Vedic astrologers " like Bhattacharjya calculate not only their own " Vedic

horoscopes " but even divinities like Shri Ram and Shri Krishen etc. etc. from

heliocentric data from JPL/NASA? They must continue to prepare them from the SS

or Grahalaghava- --since we do not have any " Vedic astronomy "

works that talk of planets vis-à-vis rashis prior to the Surya Sidhanta by Maya

the mlechha!

Just see the irony! In spite of using heliocentric planetary data of inanimate

planets like Mars, Saturn etc. from JPL/NASA in their unscientific and

anti-Vedic charts, they call their predictive gimmicks as " Vedic astrology " !

Heads I win and tail you lose! That is the real tamoguni budhih!

Then again, as usual, Shri Bhattacharjya is quoting everything without context

and out of context! May be he is again visualizing everything through his

" parokshya knowledge "

And that reminds me that in spite of doing all this exercise, he has yet to

reply the point as to when the INSA edition of VJ refers to the Rashi mantra as

spurious, how and why did Shri Bhattacharjya advise Shri K K Mehrotra to get

that edition for verifying it himself that the commentators/ translators of that

work had said that that mantra was not spurious!

Why is Shri Bhattacharjya feeling shy of admitting that had seen it only through

his " parokshya knowledge " ---- a hallucination- --i.e., something contrary to

the facts---just as he is seeing Mesha etc. rashis in the Vedas! God only knows

what other things he will visualize further through his " parokshya knowledge "

i.e., hallucinations! Better beware!

Jai Shri Ram

A K Kaul

vedic_research_ institute, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> --- On Sun, 10/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

> Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is spurious!

>

> Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology, vedic astrology@ .

com, vedic_research_ institute@ ..., indiaarchaeology,

WAVES-Vedic, kalyan97 , subashrazdan@ ...

> Sunday, October 4, 2009, 3:13 AM

>

> Dear friends,

>

> Kindly look at following statement of AKK carefully :

>

> I had also gone through the complete VJ with an exhaustive Hindi

> commentary by Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra, Jyotishacharya, published by a

>

Daryaganj, Delhi, publisher in 2003. Dr. Mishra, after discussing

> thoroughly the pros and cons, has said, without mincing any words, on

> pages 51-52 of his commentary, " ...this shloka has been interpolated by

> some good for nothing (the exact Hindi word used by Dr. Mishra is

> " angadh " ---a humpty-dumpty " intellectual " ) person, and as such gives

> very wrong results....There was nothing like a rashi of thirty degrees

> in the Vedanga Jyotisha period, but even then this mantra talks of Mina

> etc. rashis. Rashi

> word has been used in an entirely different manner like parva-rashi,

> bha-rashi etc in the VJ....This shloka has not even been numbered i.e.

> it is without any number and Somakar (a commentator of repute in the

> past) also has not commented on it " .

>

> What is all the more surprising is that this spurious mantra, without

> any number after the fourth

mantra, occurs in the Yajush-Jyotisham and

> not Rik Jyotisham! Yajush-Jyotisham is a much later work than the

> Rik-Jyotisham and as per Dr. Mishra in his foreword, " There is an

> unbroken tradition among the Vedic Brahmins

> that those who know even ABC of jyotisha recite at least once the

> Rik-Jyotisham everyday, like some Sukta etc. and it is revered like the

> Rig-Veda itself. I must make it clear here that Yajush-Jyotisham is not

> held in that high esteem at all nor is it recited daily " . Dikshit also

> has said the same thing.

>

> One person had made assertions without any proof and another had appreciated.

> !)

> Dr. Mishra obviously had not read that about the twelve divisions of the

ecliptic (or the Gopath) in the Rig Veda, which automaticaly means that each

division will be 30 degrees. In the Geocentric model it is the road by which the

Sun moves round the

earth. In that model while the Sun moves the road does not move. Any

intelligent person will understand that. Had Dr. Mishra read it he would have

realised that the ecliptic has the 27 fixed Nakshatras in that and that the 12

Rashi divisions accommodate the 27 fixed Nakshatras as shown in the Vamana

Purana.

> 2)

> It appears that Dr. Mishra himself may be a good for nothing person if he is

challenging the writer of the Vedanga Jyotisha and we have also to remember that

the famous scholar Kuppanna Shastri also considers the Rashi verse to be very

> useful and stated in his book that it is for this reason the verse is still

there. Obviously nobody had deleted it inspite of the severe onslaught from the

people who followed the Max Mullerian chronolgy, which was formulated around

1882 CE. According to Max Muller the date of Rigveda was around 1200 BCE and

all other ancient Indian shastras were considered

to be quite some centuries after that. That is why the scholars (Dixit was no

exception) right from the end of the nineteenth century got an impression that

the Rashis could have been borrowed from the Greeks. Later on David Pingree

reinforced that conviction in the unsuspecting Indian scholsrs. Any sensible

person will not value the date-related opinions of those scholars influenced by

the Max Mullerian chronology, howevermuch sincere they might have been. As

regards Dr. Mishra's qualification as Jyotishacharya it is not relevant here as

he might have passed some examination

> to get the title Jyotishacharya but that does not entitle him to make any

unsubstantiated statement.

> 3)

> The fact that Somakar had not commented on the Rashi verse does not mean that

the verse is redundant. If it was not required then Somakar would have said so.

AKK is not aware that Somakar had not commented on another verse also of

the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha. This is not relevant to the presence of the verse

in the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha.

> 4).

> Dr. Mishra is obviously ignorant of the mention of the Rashis in the Puranas

(the fifth Veda)

> 5)

> A de-numbered Rashi obviously will not have a number , wnich any intelligent

person will understand. Under the influence of Pingree some people thought that

the Rashis could not be there in Vedanga Jyotisha. As a mark of suspect they

have obviously removed its numbering but did not dare to remove the genuine

verse altogether.

> 6)

> A look at the Sanskrit dictionary will show that the

> word Rashi means a group and it can be used in that sense anywhere as and when

applicable. If it is used for Parva -Rashi etc. that does not mean that the

Puranas were wrong in using the word Rashi for designating the twelve Rashis.

Only a unthinking person can cook up such arguments.

> 7)

> If

the Rig Vedanga Jyotisha is considered more respectable than the Yajur-Vedanga

jyotisha then does i mean that the yYajur Vedanga Jyotisha is not required? If

that was so it would not have been a part of the Vedanga jyotisha at all. Only a

good for nothing person will give such hollow arguments. Whether it is in high

esteem or not as compared to the Rig Vedanga Jyotisha is not relevant to the

authenticity of the Rashi verse. Bringing such irrelevant point for discussion

itself points to a confused mind of the person bringing such points.

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Sat, 10/3/09, jyotirved

> jyotirved@.. . wrote:

>

> jyotirved jyotirved@.. .

> Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is spurious!

> hinducalendar

> Cc: ,

hinducivilization, " subash razdan " subashrazdan@ ...

> Saturday, October 3, 2009, 8:25 AM

>

> Dear friends,

>

> Jai Shri Ram!

>

> In # No. 2807 of May 27, 09 of WAVES-vedic forum Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya had

quoted his mentor as saying " Some preliminary evidence to prove the existence of

Meshadi month names in Vedic period is given below) Take the Yajur Vedanga

Jyotisha text and read the 5th sloka. It reads as follows - Ye brihaspatina

bhuktva MEENAN prabbriti rasayaH te hritaH panchabhiryataH yaH seshaH sa

parigrihaH

>

> (Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha - sloka 5)

>

> [Take the sign count of Jupiter counting from Meena Rasi (Pisces Sign),

............. .......etc] I believe you have noticed the words 'Meenan prabhriti

RasayaH' [signs counted from

Meena Rasi (Pisces Sign)]. That proves the existence of signs like Meena, Mesha

etc in Vedanga Jyotisha period. "

>

> The name " Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha " itself is misleading! There is actually no

such workI The original work is titled Vedanga Jyotisham (VJ) by Lagadha. It was

later divided into two separate portions Rik Jyotisham and Yajush-jyotishm (but

not Rik-Vednga-Jyotisha or Yajur-Vedanga jyotisha)

>

> I had already seen the translation/ commentary of the VJ by S. B. Dikshit in

his " Bharatiya Jyotisha Shastra " but he has not referred to any such mantra even

in an oblique manner. On the other hand, he has said on page 147 (English

translation) " The names of Rashis Mesha and others came into vogue at about 400

BS. The names of week days came into use before them, and have been borrowed

from foreign countries " . And Dikshit had written those words in 1896 AD,, i.e.

much before David Pingree!

>

> I

had also gone through the complete VJ with an exhaustive Hindi commentary by

Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra, Jyotishacharya, published by a Daryaganj, Delhi,

publisher in 2003. Dr. Mishra, after discussing thoroughly the pros and cons,

has said, without mincing any words, on pages 51-52 of his commentary, " ...this

shloka has been interpolated by some good for nothing (the exact Hindi word used

by Dr. Mishra is " angadh " ---a humpty-dumpty " intellectual " ) person, and as such

gives very wrong results....There was nothing like a rashi of thirty degrees in

the Vedanga Jyotisha period, but even then this mantra talks of Mina etc.

rashis. Rashi word has been used in an entirely different manner like

parva-rashi, bha-rashi etc in the VJ....This shloka has not even been numbered

i.e. it is without any number and Somakar (a commentator of repute in the past)

also has not commented on it " .

>

> What is all the more surprising is that this spurious mantra,

without any number after the fourth mantra, occurs in the Yajush-Jyotisham and

not Rik Jyotisham! Yajush-Jyotisham is a much later work than the Rik-Jyotisham

and as per Dr. Mishra in his foreword, " There is an unbroken tradition among the

Vedic Brahmins that those who know even ABC of jyotisha recite at least once the

Rik-Jyotisham everyday, like some Sukta etc. and it is revered like the Rig-Veda

itself. I must make it clear here that Yajush-Jyotisham is not held in that high

esteem at all nor is it recited daily " . Dikshit also has said the same thing.

>

> All these anachronisms were pointed out to Shri Bhattacharjya vide # 5127 dt.

June 11 of abhinavagupta forum. But he inssited in several posts to Shri K. K.

Mehrotra of waves-vedic that he must see the edition that does not refer to

rashi mantra as spurious. Shri Bhattacharjya' s message No. # No. 26262 of June

25, of Shri Bhattacharjya in vedic_research_ institute reads, " INSA stands

for Indian national Science Academy. The Vedanga Jyotisha was published in

their " Indian Journal of History of Science, Vol.19, No. 4, Supplement. Their

website is www.insa.ac. in "

>

> Shri Mehrotra had asked in #No. 5232 dt. June 26 of Abhinavagupta forum, " The

email address at which this post was sent to INSA does not exist and the mail

was received back. I, therefore, request Dr. Sunil Bhattacharjya again to give

the full address of the website wherefrom he is supposed to have downloaded the

Vedanga Jyotisha by Acharya Lagadha, with the fifth mantra showing Mina rashi " .

And this is what Shri Bhattacharjya had replied in the same post, " Shri

Mehrotra can contact Indian National Science Academy. Or he can place an order

on a bookseller for the book. If he thinks he must have the book let him get

it. "

>

> It was clear from Shri Bhattacharjya' s messsages that he had the INSA edition

ofthe VJ edition with him,

or had at least seen it and there was no doubt in his mind that the fifth

mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha (Yajush-Jyotisham) of INSA edition was not

spurious but had been listeed as fifth mantra there.

>

> Being out of print, I could not get this book anywhere. A friend of mine,

however, sent the complete electronic edition to me through email but he does

not want his name to be disclosed!

>

> This work had been translated originally by Prof. T. S. Kuppanna Sastry in a

draft form and since it could not be published during his life time, it was

later checked for corrections and edited by Dr. K. V. Sarma of Kuppannaswamy

Research Institute, Madras, and published by Indian National Science Academy,

Delhi, a government body, in 1985.

>

> To my amazement (amusement!) , from a perusal of this INSA work also I found

that the so called Rashi mantra is actually from Yajush-jyotisham and

has been referred to as a spurious mantra and is without any number in that

work as well.

>

> Let me quote the full text of the translator/commenta tor, Prof. T. S.

Kuppanna Sastry, on page 50 about the same, " This verse is patently an

interpolation. Firstly, it is unnumbered and found only in the Yajusha

recension. Secondly, the word rashi itself, meaning the division of the zodiac

of 30° each, named Mesha (Aries), Rishaba (Taurus) upto Mina (Pisces) is of

foreign origin and came to India only during first centuries AD along with Greek

astrology. Upto and including the time of last samhitas of the early centuries

of BC the only zodiacal signs known in India were the nakshatras divisions. The

word Rashi used in the VJ means only 'group', for example parva-rashi means a

group of fortnights and bha-rashi meaning the group of nakshatra segments " .

>

> Prof. Sastry himself and the editor Dr.

Sarma have given a list of manuscripts they consulted. Those manuscripts are

listed on pages 8-9 of the INSA work.

>

> It was thus a puzzle for everybody including me as to how Shri Bhattacharjya

had said so authoritatively that the INSA edition had talked of the so called

fifth mantra in the VJ referring to Mina etc. rashis not being spurious!

>

> The solution of the puzzle dawned on me with the " revelation " that Shri

Bhattacharjya is a " Parokshya-darshi " who claims to see things which others

miss! He must, therefore, have visualized this mantra in INSA edition as

original through his parokshya knowledge just as he claims to have " visualized "

: Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis--that also the so called nirayana ones---in the

Vedas through that very parokshya knowledge!

>

> Anyway, I am enclosing five pages in pdf format---Preface, pages 8-9 and

50-51---and you can verify for yourself all the details.

>

> It

appears that parokshya knowledge means, therefore, something like

" somnambulism " , or even hallucination i.e seeing things which others can't see!

That is why Shri Bhattacharjya " saw " the fifth mantra in the INSA VJ edition

also as original instead of spurious!

>

> It must also be put on record that since it is common knowledge by now that

Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis have been imported from Babylonia via Greece into

India around early centuries of CE, " Vedic astrologers " are thus themselves

trying to prove that the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha etc. etc. are all post

CE works! They are thus doing an incalculable damage to the entire cultural

history of India, in their anti-Vedic efforts to prove that Mesha etc. Rashis

and Mangal, Shani etc. planets have been referred to in the Vedas---or the

Valmiki Ramayna etc., for that matter! And the more the " Vedic astrologers " and

" Vedic astronomers " continue their such efforts, the more damage they

will go on doing to the real Vedic cultural ethos and the more we will forget

about Madhu, Madhava etc. Vedic months and continue to celebrate Lahiri or

Ramana or Muladhara etc. Makara and Mesha Sankrantis etc.!

>

> Jai Shri Ram.

>

> A K Kaul

>

> PS

>

> If any owner/moderator of any forum so desires, the complete version of the

VJ, INSA edition (pdf) can be sent by email for uploading in his/her forum.

There are no copyright hassles.

>

> AKK

>

October 5, 2009

--- On Mon, 10/5/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: [VRI] Fw: Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is spurious!vedic_research_institute Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 2:55 PMDear friends, Kindly see my earlier mail where I made it clear that I have regards

for Dixit yet I have to say that he did not access to the modern research which busted the Aryan Invasion theory and the Associated chronology and that is why he thought that the Rashis were imported from the Greeks.Regards,sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Mon, 10/5/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote:Krishen <jyotirved[VRI] Fw: Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is spurious!vedic_research_institute Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 1:58 AM

Dear friends, Jai Shri Ram!

Shri Bhattacharjya has said, "It appears that Dr. Mishra himself may be a good for nothing person if he is challenging the writer of the Vedanga Jyotisha and we have also to remember that the famous scholar Kuppanna Shastri also considers the Rashi verse to be very useful and stated in his book that it is for this reason the verse is still there. Obviously nobody had deleted it in spite of the severe onslaught from the people who followed the Max Mullerian chronology, which was formulated around1882 CE." There was absolutely no need for my friend Shri Bhattacharjya to eat such a long yarn!

All that Shri Bhattacharjya wants to prove is that except for him and some "Vedic astrologers" , all the scholars of India like S B Dikshit and Dr. Kuppanna Shastry and Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra and even Somakar or even Gita Press translators of the Valmiki Ramayana etc. etc. were/are good for nothing fellows and were/are influenced by Max Muller's chronology!

Actually, it is the other way round! "Vedic astrologers" are themselves enveloped in tamoguni budhih and that is why they twist everything the way they want to! They thus read even dharmashastras upside down!

Example is better than precept! Shri Bhattacharjya has said, "Dr. Mishra obviously had not read that about the twelve divisions of the ecliptic (or the Gopath) in the Rig Veda, which automatically means that each division will be 30 degrees. In the Geocentric model it is the road by which the Sun moves round the earth."

I am reminded of the tragic fate of Galileo of Galilee, who was made to recant the Copernicus' Heliocentric theory by the Church there and say, "The earth does not move round the sun"

The poor Galileo had to mutter silently, "et per se, it moveth" ("It is immaterial what I say, all the same, the earth does moves (round the sun)".

Besides, Shri Bhattacharjya says, "Which automatically means that each division will be 30 degrees"! In fact, the journey of the sun/earth is through Vedic months which are not of "equal divisions" of thirty days (degrees) each! It is only selfish jyotishis like Bhattacharjya who transmute the months into twelve equal divisions of the ecliptic!

If the VJ had intended to talk of Mesha etc. Rashis, it would not have felt shy of listing rashi names like Mesha etc instead of or besieds Tapah, Tapasya and Magha, Phalguna etc. months!

"Vedic astrologers" like Bhattacharjya want us to believe further that the Vedic seers had no idea about the movement of the earth and planets round the sun and believed in the Geocentric system like the Surya Sidhanta by Maya the mlechha! Thus "Vedic astrologers" are themselves belittling the Vedic seers! Even if, for the sake of argument we agree that the Vedic seers had no such knowledge that the solar system was heliocentric and not geocentric, why do "Vedic astrologers" like Bhattacharjya calculate not only their own "Vedic horoscopes" but even divinities like Shri Ram and Shri Krishen etc. etc. from heliocentric data from JPL/NASA? They must continue to prepare them from the SS or Grahalaghava- --since we do not have any "Vedic astronomy"

works that talk of planets vis-à-vis rashis prior to the Surya Sidhanta by Maya the mlechha!

Just see the irony! In spite of using heliocentric planetary data of inanimate planets like Mars, Saturn etc. from JPL/NASA in their unscientific and anti-Vedic charts, they call their predictive gimmicks as "Vedic astrology"! Heads I win and tail you lose! That is the real tamoguni budhih!

Then again, as usual, Shri Bhattacharjya is quoting everything without context and out of context! May be he is again visualizing everything through his "parokshya knowledge"

And that reminds me that in spite of doing all this exercise, he has yet to reply the point as to when the INSA edition of VJ refers to the Rashi mantra as spurious, how and why did Shri Bhattacharjya advise Shri K K Mehrotra to get that edition for verifying it himself that the commentators/ translators of that work had said that that mantra was not spurious!

Why is Shri Bhattacharjya feeling shy of admitting that had seen it only through his "parokshya knowledge" ---- a hallucination- --i.e., something contrary to the facts---just as he is seeing Mesha etc. rashis in the Vedas! God only knows what other things he will visualize further through his "parokshya knowledge" i.e., hallucinations! Better beware!

Jai Shri Ram

A K Kaul

vedic_research_ institute, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:>> > > --- On Sun, 10/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:> > Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is spurious!> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology, vedic astrology, vedic_research_ institute@ ..., indiaarchaeology, WAVES-Vedic, kalyan97 , subashrazdan@ ...> Sunday, October 4, 2009, 3:13 AM> > Dear friends,> > Kindly look at following statement of AKK carefully :> > I had also gone through the complete VJ with an exhaustive Hindi> commentary by Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra, Jyotishacharya, published by a>

Daryaganj, Delhi, publisher in 2003. Dr. Mishra, after discussing> thoroughly the pros and cons, has said, without mincing any words, on> pages 51-52 of his commentary, "...this shloka has been interpolated by> some good for nothing (the exact Hindi word used by Dr. Mishra is> "angadh"---a humpty-dumpty "intellectual" ) person, and as such gives> very wrong results....There was nothing like a rashi of thirty degrees> in the Vedanga Jyotisha period, but even then this mantra talks of Mina> etc. rashis. Rashi> word has been used in an entirely different manner like parva-rashi,> bha-rashi etc in the VJ....This shloka has not even been numbered i.e.> it is without any number and Somakar (a commentator of repute in the> past) also has not commented on it".> > What is all the more surprising is that this spurious mantra, without> any number after the fourth

mantra, occurs in the Yajush-Jyotisham and> not Rik Jyotisham! Yajush-Jyotisham is a much later work than the> Rik-Jyotisham and as per Dr. Mishra in his foreword, "There is an> unbroken tradition among the Vedic Brahmins> that those who know even ABC of jyotisha recite at least once the> Rik-Jyotisham everyday, like some Sukta etc. and it is revered like the> Rig-Veda itself. I must make it clear here that Yajush-Jyotisham is not> held in that high esteem at all nor is it recited daily". Dikshit also> has said the same thing.> > One person had made assertions without any proof and another had appreciated. > !)> Dr. Mishra obviously had not read that about the twelve divisions of the ecliptic (or the Gopath) in the Rig Veda, which automaticaly means that each division will be 30 degrees. In the Geocentric model it is the road by which the Sun moves round the

earth. In that model while the Sun moves the road does not move. Any intelligent person will understand that. Had Dr. Mishra read it he would have realised that the ecliptic has the 27 fixed Nakshatras in that and that the 12 Rashi divisions accommodate the 27 fixed Nakshatras as shown in the Vamana Purana.> 2)> It appears that Dr. Mishra himself may be a good for nothing person if he is challenging the writer of the Vedanga Jyotisha and we have also to remember that the famous scholar Kuppanna Shastri also considers the Rashi verse to be very> useful and stated in his book that it is for this reason the verse is still there. Obviously nobody had deleted it inspite of the severe onslaught from the people who followed the Max Mullerian chronolgy, which was formulated around 1882 CE. According to Max Muller the date of Rigveda was around 1200 BCE and all other ancient Indian shastras were considered

to be quite some centuries after that. That is why the scholars (Dixit was no exception) right from the end of the nineteenth century got an impression that the Rashis could have been borrowed from the Greeks. Later on David Pingree reinforced that conviction in the unsuspecting Indian scholsrs. Any sensible person will not value the date-related opinions of those scholars influenced by the Max Mullerian chronology, howevermuch sincere they might have been. As regards Dr. Mishra's qualification as Jyotishacharya it is not relevant here as he might have passed some examination> to get the title Jyotishacharya but that does not entitle him to make any unsubstantiated statement. > 3)> The fact that Somakar had not commented on the Rashi verse does not mean that the verse is redundant. If it was not required then Somakar would have said so. AKK is not aware that Somakar had not commented on another verse also of

the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha. This is not relevant to the presence of the verse in the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha.> 4).> Dr. Mishra is obviously ignorant of the mention of the Rashis in the Puranas (the fifth Veda)> 5)> A de-numbered Rashi obviously will not have a number , wnich any intelligent person will understand. Under the influence of Pingree some people thought that the Rashis could not be there in Vedanga Jyotisha. As a mark of suspect they have obviously removed its numbering but did not dare to remove the genuine verse altogether.> 6)> A look at the Sanskrit dictionary will show that the> word Rashi means a group and it can be used in that sense anywhere as and when applicable. If it is used for Parva -Rashi etc. that does not mean that the Puranas were wrong in using the word Rashi for designating the twelve Rashis. Only a unthinking person can cook up such arguments.> 7) > If

the Rig Vedanga Jyotisha is considered more respectable than the Yajur-Vedanga jyotisha then does i mean that the yYajur Vedanga Jyotisha is not required? If that was so it would not have been a part of the Vedanga jyotisha at all. Only a good for nothing person will give such hollow arguments. Whether it is in high esteem or not as compared to the Rig Vedanga Jyotisha is not relevant to the authenticity of the Rashi verse. Bringing such irrelevant point for discussion itself points to a confused mind of the person bringing such points.> > Regards,> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya> > > > > > > --- On Sat, 10/3/09, jyotirved> jyotirved@.. . wrote:> > jyotirved jyotirved@.. .> Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is spurious!> hinducalendar> Cc: ,

hinducivilization, "subash razdan" subashrazdan@ ...> Saturday, October 3, 2009, 8:25 AM> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear friends,> > Jai Shri Ram!> > In # No. 2807 of May 27, 09 of WAVES-vedic forum Shri Sunil Bhattacharjya had quoted his mentor as saying "Some preliminary evidence to prove the existence of Meshadi month names in Vedic period is given below) Take the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha text and read the 5th sloka. It reads as follows - Ye brihaspatina bhuktva MEENAN prabbriti rasayaH te hritaH panchabhiryataH yaH seshaH sa parigrihaH> > (Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha - sloka 5)> > > > [Take the sign count of Jupiter counting from Meena Rasi (Pisces Sign), ............ .......etc] I believe you have noticed the words 'Meenan prabhriti RasayaH' [signs counted from

Meena Rasi (Pisces Sign)]. That proves the existence of signs like Meena, Mesha etc in Vedanga Jyotisha period."> > > > The name "Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha" itself is misleading! There is actually no such workI The original work is titled Vedanga Jyotisham (VJ) by Lagadha. It was later divided into two separate portions Rik Jyotisham and Yajush-jyotishm (but not Rik-Vednga-Jyotisha or Yajur-Vedanga jyotisha)> > I had already seen the translation/ commentary of the VJ by S. B. Dikshit in his "Bharatiya Jyotisha Shastra" but he has not referred to any such mantra even in an oblique manner. On the other hand, he has said on page 147 (English translation) "The names of Rashis Mesha and others came into vogue at about 400 BS. The names of week days came into use before them, and have been borrowed from foreign countries". And Dikshit had written those words in 1896 AD,, i.e. much before David Pingree!> > I

had also gone through the complete VJ with an exhaustive Hindi commentary by Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra, Jyotishacharya, published by a Daryaganj, Delhi, publisher in 2003. Dr. Mishra, after discussing thoroughly the pros and cons, has said, without mincing any words, on pages 51-52 of his commentary, "...this shloka has been interpolated by some good for nothing (the exact Hindi word used by Dr. Mishra is "angadh"---a humpty-dumpty "intellectual" ) person, and as such gives very wrong results....There was nothing like a rashi of thirty degrees in the Vedanga Jyotisha period, but even then this mantra talks of Mina etc. rashis. Rashi word has been used in an entirely different manner like parva-rashi, bha-rashi etc in the VJ....This shloka has not even been numbered i.e. it is without any number and Somakar (a commentator of repute in the past) also has not commented on it".> > What is all the more surprising is that this spurious mantra,

without any number after the fourth mantra, occurs in the Yajush-Jyotisham and not Rik Jyotisham! Yajush-Jyotisham is a much later work than the Rik-Jyotisham and as per Dr. Mishra in his foreword, "There is an unbroken tradition among the Vedic Brahmins that those who know even ABC of jyotisha recite at least once the Rik-Jyotisham everyday, like some Sukta etc. and it is revered like the Rig-Veda itself. I must make it clear here that Yajush-Jyotisham is not held in that high esteem at all nor is it recited daily". Dikshit also has said the same thing.> > All these anachronisms were pointed out to Shri Bhattacharjya vide # 5127 dt. June 11 of abhinavagupta forum. But he inssited in several posts to Shri K. K. Mehrotra of waves-vedic that he must see the edition that does not refer to rashi mantra as spurious. Shri Bhattacharjya' s message No. # No. 26262 of June 25, of Shri Bhattacharjya in vedic_research_ institute reads, "INSA stands

for Indian national Science Academy. The Vedanga Jyotisha was published in their "Indian Journal of History of Science, Vol.19, No. 4, Supplement. Their website is www.insa.ac. in"> > > > Shri Mehrotra had asked in #No. 5232 dt. June 26 of Abhinavagupta forum, "The email address at which this post was sent to INSA does not exist and the mail was received back. I, therefore, request Dr. Sunil Bhattacharjya again to give the full address of the website wherefrom he is supposed to have downloaded the Vedanga Jyotisha by Acharya Lagadha, with the fifth mantra showing Mina rashi". And this is what Shri Bhattacharjya had replied in the same post, " Shri Mehrotra can contact Indian National Science Academy. Or he can place an order on a bookseller for the book. If he thinks he must have the book let him get it."> > It was clear from Shri Bhattacharjya' s messsages that he had the INSA edition ofthe VJ edition with him,

or had at least seen it and there was no doubt in his mind that the fifth mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha (Yajush-Jyotisham) of INSA edition was not spurious but had been listeed as fifth mantra there.> > > > Being out of print, I could not get this book anywhere. A friend of mine, however, sent the complete electronic edition to me through email but he does not want his name to be disclosed!> > This work had been translated originally by Prof. T. S. Kuppanna Sastry in a draft form and since it could not be published during his life time, it was later checked for corrections and edited by Dr. K. V. Sarma of Kuppannaswamy Research Institute, Madras, and published by Indian National Science Academy, Delhi, a government body, in 1985.> > > > To my amazement (amusement!) , from a perusal of this INSA work also I found that the so called Rashi mantra is actually from Yajush-jyotisham and

has been referred to as a spurious mantra and is without any number in that work as well.> > > > Let me quote the full text of the translator/commenta tor, Prof. T. S. Kuppanna Sastry, on page 50 about the same, "This verse is patently an interpolation. Firstly, it is unnumbered and found only in the Yajusha recension. Secondly, the word rashi itself, meaning the division of the zodiac of 30° each, named Mesha (Aries), Rishaba (Taurus) upto Mina (Pisces) is of foreign origin and came to India only during first centuries AD along with Greek astrology. Upto and including the time of last samhitas of the early centuries of BC the only zodiacal signs known in India were the nakshatras divisions. The word Rashi used in the VJ means only 'group', for example parva-rashi means a group of fortnights and bha-rashi meaning the group of nakshatra segments".> > > > Prof. Sastry himself and the editor Dr.

Sarma have given a list of manuscripts they consulted. Those manuscripts are listed on pages 8-9 of the INSA work.> > It was thus a puzzle for everybody including me as to how Shri Bhattacharjya had said so authoritatively that the INSA edition had talked of the so called fifth mantra in the VJ referring to Mina etc. rashis not being spurious!> > The solution of the puzzle dawned on me with the "revelation" that Shri Bhattacharjya is a "Parokshya-darshi" who claims to see things which others miss! He must, therefore, have visualized this mantra in INSA edition as original through his parokshya knowledge just as he claims to have "visualized" : Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis--that also the so called nirayana ones---in the Vedas through that very parokshya knowledge! > > Anyway, I am enclosing five pages in pdf format---Preface, pages 8-9 and 50-51---and you can verify for yourself all the details.> > It

appears that parokshya knowledge means, therefore, something like "somnambulism" , or even hallucination i.e seeing things which others can't see! That is why Shri Bhattacharjya "saw" the fifth mantra in the INSA VJ edition also as original instead of spurious! > > It must also be put on record that since it is common knowledge by now that Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis have been imported from Babylonia via Greece into India around early centuries of CE, "Vedic astrologers" are thus themselves trying to prove that the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha etc. etc. are all post CE works! They are thus doing an incalculable damage to the entire cultural history of India, in their anti-Vedic efforts to prove that Mesha etc. Rashis and Mangal, Shani etc. planets have been referred to in the Vedas---or the Valmiki Ramayna etc., for that matter! And the more the "Vedic astrologers" and "Vedic astronomers" continue their such efforts, the more damage they

will go on doing to the real Vedic cultural ethos and the more we will forget about Madhu, Madhava etc. Vedic months and continue to celebrate Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara etc. Makara and Mesha Sankrantis etc.!> > Jai Shri Ram.> > A K Kaul> > PS> > If any owner/moderator of any forum so desires, the complete version of the VJ, INSA edition (pdf) can be sent by email for uploading in his/her forum. There are no copyright hassles.> > AKK > > > >

October 6, 2009

Dear friends,

Jai Shri Ram!

<(S. B. Dikshit) did not have access to the modern research which busted

the Aryan Invasion theory and the Associated chronology and that is why

he thought that the Rashis were imported from the Greeks.>

What has AIT to do with non-existence of Mesha, Vrisha etc. rashis in

the Vedas or the Vedanga Jyotisha or the Atharva Jyotisha or Atharva

Veda Parishishta etc? Were those rashis removed from the Vedas by

Aryans themselves irrespective of the AIT being correct or not?

S. B. Dikshit and Dr. M. N. Saha and Kuppanna Sastry and quite a few

other scholars have done an independent study of their own and arrived

at the conclusion that there were no Mesha etc. Rashis in the Vedas or

the Vedanga Jyotisha because they are not there actually!

If you do not find some item in some work, you have to admit that it

does not exist there!

Dr. R. N. Iyengar, Raja Ramanna Fellow, IISc., Bangalore, is one of the

most versatile and well read scholars as well as scientists of modern

India. He has gone through all the Vedas, the Vedangas, the Grihya

Sutras and even the Puranas etc. etc. He has written several papers,

which are available on scribd etc. He is catagorically of the view that

there are no Mesha, Vrisha etc. rashis in the Vedas or the Vedanga

jyotisha etc. He knows all about AIT and does not believe in it.

The billion dollar question that has not been answered by anybody till

date is that if prior to the Surya Sidhanta by Maya the mlechha, there

is no work available which tells us the methodology of calculating

planets vis-a-vis Mesha etc. Rashis, how on earth did the Vedic seers

calculate their " Vedic horoscopes " ?

For that matter, we do not have any mention of any planets like Mars,

Saturn etc. in any of the Vedas! To thrust down the throat of the

general public " grahas " in the garb of " deities " is not desirable at all

for the robust Vedic culture!

Then again, we do not have any shastra advising us to consult some

soothsayer before embarking on any job! If Shri Bhattacharjya is so

sure that the Manu has advised a king to consult jyotishi, he must

quote the relevant mantra, with the translation, mentioning the edition

from which that mantra has been taken?

Jai Shri Ram!

A K Kaul

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> --- On Mon, 10/5/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

wrote:

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

> Re: [VRI] Fw: Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga

Jyotisha is spurious!

> vedic_research_institute

<vedic_research_institute >

> Monday, October 5, 2009, 2:55 PM

>

> Dear friends,

>

> Kindly see my earlier mail where I made it clear that I have regards

for Dixit yet I have to say that he did not access to the modern

research which busted the Aryan Invasion theory and the Associated

chronology and that is why he thought that the Rashis were imported from

the Greeks.

>

> Regards,

>

> sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

> --- On Mon, 10/5/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote:

>

> Krishen <jyotirved

> [VRI] Fw: Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga

Jyotisha is spurious!

> vedic_research_institute

<vedic_research_institute >

> Monday, October 5, 2009, 1:58 AM

>

Dear friends,

> Jai Shri Ram!

> Shri Bhattacharjya has said, " It appears that Dr. Mishra himself may

be a good for nothing person if he is challenging the writer of the

Vedanga Jyotisha and we have also to remember that the famous scholar

Kuppanna Shastri also considers the Rashi verse to be very useful and

stated in his book that it is for this reason the verse is still there.

Obviously nobody had deleted it in spite of the severe onslaught from

the people who followed the Max Mullerian chronology, which was

formulated around

> 1882 CE. "

> There was absolutely no need for my friend Shri Bhattacharjya to eat

such a long yarn!

> All that Shri Bhattacharjya wants to prove is that except for him and

some " Vedic astrologers " , all the scholars of India like S B Dikshit

and Dr. Kuppanna Shastry and Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra and even Somakar

or even Gita Press translators of the Valmiki Ramayana etc. etc.

were/are good for nothing fellows and were/are influenced by Max

Muller's chronology!

> Actually, it is the other way round! " Vedic astrologers " are

themselves enveloped in tamoguni budhih and that is why they twist

everything the way they want to! They thus read even dharmashastras

upside down!

> Example is better than precept! Shri Bhattacharjya has said, " Dr.

Mishra obviously had not read that about the twelve divisions of the

ecliptic (or the Gopath) in the Rig Veda, which automatically means

that each division will be 30 degrees. In the Geocentric model it is the

road by which the Sun moves round the earth. "

> I am reminded of the tragic fate of Galileo of Galilee, who was made

to recant the Copernicus' Heliocentric theory by the Church there and

say, " The earth does not move round the sun "

> The poor Galileo had to mutter silently, " et per se, it moveth " ( " It

is immaterial what I say, all the same, the earth does moves (round the

sun) " .

> Besides, Shri Bhattacharjya says, " Which automatically means that each

division will be 30 degrees " ! In fact, the journey of the sun/earth is

through Vedic months which are not of " equal divisions " of thirty days

(degrees) each! It is only selfish jyotishis like Bhattacharjya who

transmute the months into twelve equal divisions of the ecliptic!

> If the VJ had intended to talk of Mesha etc. Rashis, it would not

have felt shy of listing rashi names like Mesha etc instead of or

besieds Tapah, Tapasya and Magha, Phalguna etc. months!

> " Vedic astrologers " like Bhattacharjya want us to believe further that

the Vedic seers had no idea about the movement of the earth and planets

round the sun and believed in the Geocentric system like the Surya

Sidhanta by Maya the mlechha! Thus " Vedic astrologers " are themselves

belittling the Vedic seers! Even if, for the sake of argument we agree

that the Vedic seers had no such knowledge that the solar system was

heliocentric and not geocentric, why do " Vedic astrologers " like

Bhattacharjya calculate not only their own " Vedic horoscopes " but even

divinities like Shri Ram and Shri Krishen etc. etc. from heliocentric

data from JPL/NASA? They must continue to prepare them from the SS or

Grahalaghava- --since we do not have any " Vedic astronomy "

> works that talk of planets vis-à-vis rashis prior to the Surya

Sidhanta by Maya the mlechha!

> Just see the irony! In spite of using heliocentric planetary data of

inanimate planets like Mars, Saturn etc. from JPL/NASA in their

unscientific and anti-Vedic charts, they call their predictive gimmicks

as " Vedic astrology " ! Heads I win and tail you lose! That is the real

tamoguni budhih!

> Then again, as usual, Shri Bhattacharjya is quoting everything

without context and out of context! May be he is again visualizing

everything through his " parokshya knowledge "

> And that reminds me that in spite of doing all this exercise, he has

yet to reply the point as to when the INSA edition of VJ refers to the

Rashi mantra as spurious, how and why did Shri Bhattacharjya advise Shri

K K Mehrotra to get that edition for verifying it himself that the

commentators/ translators of that work had said that that mantra was not

spurious!

> Why is Shri Bhattacharjya feeling shy of admitting that had seen it

only through his " parokshya knowledge " ---- a hallucination- --i.e.,

something contrary to the facts---just as he is seeing Mesha etc. rashis

in the Vedas! God only knows what other things he will visualize

further through his " parokshya knowledge " i.e., hallucinations! Better

beware!

>

> Jai Shri Ram

> A K Kaul

>

> vedic_research_ institute, Sunil

Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

> >

> > --- On Sun, 10/4/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

wrote:

> >

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya

> > Re: Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is

spurious!

> >

> > Cc: ancient_indian_ astrology, vedic astrology@

. com, vedic_research_ institute@ ..., indiaarchaeology@

. com, WAVES-Vedic, kalyan97@ ,

subashrazdan@ ...

> > Sunday, October 4, 2009, 3:13 AM

> >

> > Dear friends,

> >

> > Kindly look at following statement of AKK carefully :

> >

> > I had also gone through the complete VJ with an exhaustive Hindi

> > commentary by Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra, Jyotishacharya, published

by a

> >

> Daryaganj, Delhi, publisher in 2003. Dr. Mishra, after discussing

> > thoroughly the pros and cons, has said, without mincing any words,

on

> > pages 51-52 of his commentary, " ...this shloka has been interpolated

by

> > some good for nothing (the exact Hindi word used by Dr. Mishra is

> > " angadh " ---a humpty-dumpty " intellectual " ) person, and as such

gives

> > very wrong results....There was nothing like a rashi of thirty

degrees

> > in the Vedanga Jyotisha period, but even then this mantra talks of

Mina

> > etc. rashis. Rashi

> > word has been used in an entirely different manner like parva-rashi,

> > bha-rashi etc in the VJ....This shloka has not even been numbered

i.e.

> > it is without any number and Somakar (a commentator of repute in the

> > past) also has not commented on it " .

> >

> > What is all the more surprising is that this spurious mantra,

without

> > any number after the fourth

> mantra, occurs in the Yajush-Jyotisham and

> > not Rik Jyotisham! Yajush-Jyotisham is a much later work than the

> > Rik-Jyotisham and as per Dr. Mishra in his foreword, " There is an

> > unbroken tradition among the Vedic Brahmins

> > that those who know even ABC of jyotisha recite at least once the

> > Rik-Jyotisham everyday, like some Sukta etc. and it is revered like

the

> > Rig-Veda itself. I must make it clear here that Yajush-Jyotisham is

not

> > held in that high esteem at all nor is it recited daily " . Dikshit

also

> > has said the same thing.

> >

> > One person had made assertions without any proof and another had

appreciated.

> > !)

> > Dr. Mishra obviously had not read that about the twelve divisions

of the ecliptic (or the Gopath) in the Rig Veda, which automaticaly

means that each division will be 30 degrees. In the Geocentric model it

is the road by which the Sun moves round the

> earth. In that model while the Sun moves the road does not move. Any

intelligent person will understand that. Had Dr. Mishra read it he

would have realised that the ecliptic has the 27 fixed Nakshatras in

that and that the 12 Rashi divisions accommodate the 27 fixed Nakshatras

as shown in the Vamana Purana.

> > 2)

> > It appears that Dr. Mishra himself may be a good for nothing person

if he is challenging the writer of the Vedanga Jyotisha and we have also

to remember that the famous scholar Kuppanna Shastri also considers the

Rashi verse to be very

> > useful and stated in his book that it is for this reason the verse

is still there. Obviously nobody had deleted it inspite of the severe

onslaught from the people who followed the Max Mullerian chronolgy,

which was formulated around 1882 CE. According to Max Muller the date

of Rigveda was around 1200 BCE and all other ancient Indian shastras

were considered

> to be quite some centuries after that. That is why the scholars

(Dixit was no exception) right from the end of the nineteenth century

got an impression that the Rashis could have been borrowed from the

Greeks. Later on David Pingree reinforced that conviction in the

unsuspecting Indian scholsrs. Any sensible person will not value the

date-related opinions of those scholars influenced by the Max Mullerian

chronology, howevermuch sincere they might have been. As regards Dr.

Mishra's qualification as Jyotishacharya it is not relevant here as he

might have passed some examination

> > to get the title Jyotishacharya but that does not entitle him to

make any unsubstantiated statement.

> > 3)

> > The fact that Somakar had not commented on the Rashi verse does not

mean that the verse is redundant. If it was not required then Somakar

would have said so. AKK is not aware that Somakar had not commented on

another verse also of

> the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha. This is not relevant to the presence of

the verse in the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha.

> > 4).

> > Dr. Mishra is obviously ignorant of the mention of the Rashis in the

Puranas (the fifth Veda)

> > 5)

> > A de-numbered Rashi obviously will not have a number , wnich any

intelligent person will understand. Under the influence of Pingree some

people thought that the Rashis could not be there in Vedanga Jyotisha.

As a mark of suspect they have obviously removed its numbering but did

not dare to remove the genuine verse altogether.

> > 6)

> > A look at the Sanskrit dictionary will show that the

> > word Rashi means a group and it can be used in that sense anywhere

as and when applicable. If it is used for Parva -Rashi etc. that does

not mean that the Puranas were wrong in using the word Rashi for

designating the twelve Rashis. Only a unthinking person can cook up

such arguments.

> > 7)

> > If

> the Rig Vedanga Jyotisha is considered more respectable than the

Yajur-Vedanga jyotisha then does i mean that the yYajur Vedanga Jyotisha

is not required? If that was so it would not have been a part of the

Vedanga jyotisha at all. Only a good for nothing person will give such

hollow arguments. Whether it is in high esteem or not as compared to the

Rig Vedanga Jyotisha is not relevant to the authenticity of the Rashi

verse. Bringing such irrelevant point for discussion itself points to a

confused mind of the person bringing such points.

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > --- On Sat, 10/3/09, jyotirved

> > jyotirved@ . wrote:

> >

> > jyotirved jyotirved@ .

> > Rashi mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha is

spurious!

> > hinducalendar

> > Cc: ,

> hinducivilization, " subash razdan " subashrazdan@

....

> > Saturday, October 3, 2009, 8:25 AM

> >

> > Dear friends,

> >

> > Jai Shri Ram!

> >

> > In # No. 2807 of May 27, 09 of WAVES-vedic forum Shri Sunil

Bhattacharjya had quoted his mentor as saying " Some preliminary evidence

to prove the existence of Meshadi month names in Vedic period is given

below) Take the Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha text and read the 5th sloka. It

reads as follows - Ye brihaspatina bhuktva MEENAN prabbriti rasayaH te

hritaH panchabhiryataH yaH seshaH sa parigrihaH

> >

> > (Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha - sloka 5)

> >

> > [Take the sign count of Jupiter counting from Meena Rasi (Pisces

Sign), ............ .......etc] I believe you have noticed the words

'Meenan prabhriti RasayaH' [signs counted from

> Meena Rasi (Pisces Sign)]. That proves the existence of signs like

Meena, Mesha etc in Vedanga Jyotisha period. "

> >

> > The name " Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha " itself is misleading! There is

actually no such workI The original work is titled Vedanga Jyotisham

(VJ) by Lagadha. It was later divided into two separate portions Rik

Jyotisham and Yajush-jyotishm (but not Rik-Vednga-Jyotisha or

Yajur-Vedanga jyotisha)

> >

> > I had already seen the translation/ commentary of the VJ by S. B.

Dikshit in his " Bharatiya Jyotisha Shastra " but he has not referred to

any such mantra even in an oblique manner. On the other hand, he has

said on page 147 (English translation) " The names of Rashis Mesha and

others came into vogue at about 400 BS. The names of week days came into

use before them, and have been borrowed from foreign countries " . And

Dikshit had written those words in 1896 AD,, i.e. much before David

Pingree!

> >

> > I

> had also gone through the complete VJ with an exhaustive Hindi

commentary by Dr. Suresh Chandra Mishra, Jyotishacharya, published by a

Daryaganj, Delhi, publisher in 2003. Dr. Mishra, after discussing

thoroughly the pros and cons, has said, without mincing any words, on

pages 51-52 of his commentary, " ...this shloka has been interpolated by

some good for nothing (the exact Hindi word used by Dr. Mishra is

" angadh " ---a humpty-dumpty " intellectual " ) person, and as such gives

very wrong results....There was nothing like a rashi of thirty degrees

in the Vedanga Jyotisha period, but even then this mantra talks of Mina

etc. rashis. Rashi word has been used in an entirely different manner

like parva-rashi, bha-rashi etc in the VJ....This shloka has not even

been numbered i.e. it is without any number and Somakar (a commentator

of repute in the past) also has not commented on it " .

> >

> > What is all the more surprising is that this spurious mantra,

> without any number after the fourth mantra, occurs in the

Yajush-Jyotisham and not Rik Jyotisham! Yajush-Jyotisham is a much later

work than the Rik-Jyotisham and as per Dr. Mishra in his foreword,

" There is an unbroken tradition among the Vedic Brahmins that those who

know even ABC of jyotisha recite at least once the Rik-Jyotisham

everyday, like some Sukta etc. and it is revered like the Rig-Veda

itself. I must make it clear here that Yajush-Jyotisham is not held in

that high esteem at all nor is it recited daily " . Dikshit also has said

the same thing.

> >

> > All these anachronisms were pointed out to Shri Bhattacharjya vide #

5127 dt. June 11 of abhinavagupta forum. But he inssited in several

posts to Shri K. K. Mehrotra of waves-vedic that he must see the edition

that does not refer to rashi mantra as spurious. Shri Bhattacharjya' s

message No. # No. 26262 of June 25, of Shri Bhattacharjya in

vedic_research_ institute reads, " INSA stands

> for Indian national Science Academy. The Vedanga Jyotisha was

published in their " Indian Journal of History of Science, Vol.19, No. 4,

Supplement. Their website is www.insa.ac <http://www.insa.ac> . in "

> >

> > Shri Mehrotra had asked in #No. 5232 dt. June 26 of Abhinavagupta

forum, " The email address at which this post was sent to INSA does not

exist and the mail was received back. I, therefore, request Dr. Sunil

Bhattacharjya again to give the full address of the website wherefrom he

is supposed to have downloaded the Vedanga Jyotisha by Acharya Lagadha,

with the fifth mantra showing Mina rashi " . And this is what Shri

Bhattacharjya had replied in the same post, " Shri Mehrotra can contact

Indian National Science Academy. Or he can place an order on a

bookseller for the book. If he thinks he must have the book let him get

it. "

> >

> > It was clear from Shri Bhattacharjya' s messsages that he had the

INSA edition ofthe VJ edition with him,

> or had at least seen it and there was no doubt in his mind that the

fifth mantra in the Vedanga Jyotisha (Yajush-Jyotisham) of INSA edition

was not spurious but had been listeed as fifth mantra there.

> >

> > Being out of print, I could not get this book anywhere. A friend of

mine, however, sent the complete electronic edition to me through email

but he does not want his name to be disclosed!

> >

> > This work had been translated originally by Prof. T. S. Kuppanna

Sastry in a draft form and since it could not be published during his

life time, it was later checked for corrections and edited by Dr. K. V.

Sarma of Kuppannaswamy Research Institute, Madras, and published by

Indian National Science Academy, Delhi, a government body, in 1985.

> >

> > To my amazement (amusement!) , from a perusal of this INSA work also

I found that the so called Rashi mantra is actually from

Yajush-jyotisham and

> has been referred to as a spurious mantra and is without any number

in that work as well.

> >

> > Let me quote the full text of the translator/commenta tor, Prof. T.

S. Kuppanna Sastry, on page 50 about the same, " This verse is patently

an interpolation. Firstly, it is unnumbered and found only in the

Yajusha recension. Secondly, the word rashi itself, meaning the division

of the zodiac of 30° each, named Mesha (Aries), Rishaba (Taurus) upto

Mina (Pisces) is of foreign origin and came to India only during first

centuries AD along with Greek astrology. Upto and including the time of

last samhitas of the early centuries of BC the only zodiacal signs known

in India were the nakshatras divisions. The word Rashi used in the VJ

means only 'group', for example parva-rashi means a group of fortnights

and bha-rashi meaning the group of nakshatra segments " .

> >

> > Prof. Sastry himself and the editor Dr.

> Sarma have given a list of manuscripts they consulted. Those

manuscripts are listed on pages 8-9 of the INSA work.

> >

> > It was thus a puzzle for everybody including me as to how Shri

Bhattacharjya had said so authoritatively that the INSA edition had

talked of the so called fifth mantra in the VJ referring to Mina etc.

rashis not being spurious!

> >

> > The solution of the puzzle dawned on me with the " revelation " that

Shri Bhattacharjya is a " Parokshya-darshi " who claims to see things

which others miss! He must, therefore, have visualized this mantra in

INSA edition as original through his parokshya knowledge just as he

claims to have " visualized " : Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis--that also the

so called nirayana ones---in the Vedas through that very parokshya

knowledge!

> >

> > Anyway, I am enclosing five pages in pdf format---Preface, pages 8-9

and 50-51---and you can verify for yourself all the details.

> >

> > It

> appears that parokshya knowledge means, therefore, something like

" somnambulism " , or even hallucination i.e seeing things which others

can't see! That is why Shri Bhattacharjya " saw " the fifth mantra in the

INSA VJ edition also as original instead of spurious!

> >

> > It must also be put on record that since it is common knowledge by

now that Mesha, Vrisha etc. Rashis have been imported from Babylonia via

Greece into India around early centuries of CE, " Vedic astrologers " are

thus themselves trying to prove that the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha

etc. etc. are all post CE works! They are thus doing an incalculable

damage to the entire cultural history of India, in their anti-Vedic

efforts to prove that Mesha etc. Rashis and Mangal, Shani etc. planets

have been referred to in the Vedas---or the Valmiki Ramayna etc., for

that matter! And the more the " Vedic astrologers " and " Vedic

astronomers " continue their such efforts, the more damage they

> will go on doing to the real Vedic cultural ethos and the more we

will forget about Madhu, Madhava etc. Vedic months and continue to

celebrate Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara etc. Makara and Mesha Sankrantis

etc.!

> >

> > Jai Shri Ram.

> >

> > A K Kaul

> >

> > PS

> >

> > If any owner/moderator of any forum so desires, the complete version

of the VJ, INSA edition (pdf) can be sent by email for uploading in

his/her forum. There are no copyright hassles.

> >

> > AKK

> >

October 7, 2009

, " Krishen " <jyotirved wrote: