Fw: [VRI] Fw: Dating of Ramayana Period

[Guest guest]

Dear Goelji,Has Kaul become mad? He is talking about ayanamsa corrections etc. at the time of Ramayana, wnen the rishis were directly looking at the sky to find out the actual positons of the heavenly bodies. Say if the Lord took birth at Navami tithi with the Sun in around 27 degree in Mina then the Purnima might have occurred when the Sun came to around 3 degree of Mesha. Opposite to that was Chitra ie. the Purnima occurred in Chitra hence the Lunar month when Lord Rama was born in was undoubtedly Chaitra. But this foolish man does not know astronomy and tries to show off with his utter ignorance. He is trying to waste everybody's time. Regards,Sunil K Bhattacharjya--- On Thu, 10/15/09, jyotirved <jyotirved wrote:jyotirved <jyotirved[VRI] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana Period Cc: hinducalendar , indian_astrology_group_daily_digest , "'subash razdan'" <subashrazdan, indiaarchaeology , Vedic AstrologyForum Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 9:02 AM

 

 

 

 

Dear Shri

Gopal Krishna Goel-ji, Gopal

Krishna ki jai! In your

original post of Oct 8 you have said: "1.

There may be some reasons to believe, but sloka does not say that Rama

was born in dark or bright half of the lunar month.

2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was referred in

the text. In that case Sun can be either in Pisces or

Aries".†Since you

are a scholar of the Valmiki Ramayana, Ramacharitamanasa and Adyatma Ramayana,

you must appreciate that there are a few astronomical impossibilities in this

statement: 1. The

Valmiki Ramayana 1/18/8 has said tato yajnye

sampate tu ritoonam shat samatyayuh tatashchai dwadashe maase chaitre navamike

tithav The Gita

Press translation says, “In the meantime six seasons (each consisting of

two months) rolled away after the sacrifice was over. Then on the ninth

lunar day (of the bright fortnight) of Chaitra, the twelfth month after the

conclusion of the sacrifice, ...." Since twelve

months had elapsed after the sacrifice was over, which was in Vasanta Ritiu, it

was therefore the first month of Vasanta Ritu, which is known as Madhu as per

the Vedas and the Vedanga Jyotisha etc., when Bhagwan Ram incarnated. It

is the same month that is also known as Chaitra in the VJ. Though in the VR no

mention has been made of "Madhu" but only Chaitra, however, the

Adyatma Ramayana, 1/3/14 has said categorically: 2. Madhumase

site pakshye navamyam karkate shubhe Punarvasu rikshya sahite uchhasthe graha

panchake Which means,

“In the month of Madhu, in shukla pakshya, navmi tithi, karkata (lagna),

Punarvasu nakshatra and five planets either exalted or in their own

rashisâ€. Similarly,

Goswami Tulsidas is very sure when he says 3. Navmi

tithi madhumasa puneeta sukal pachha abhijta haripreeta i.e.

“It was the holy Madhumasa, navmi tithi, shkula pakshya and abhijit, which

is dear to Godâ€. It is thus

clear that it was the first month of Vasanta Ritu, the month of

Madhu-cum-Chaitra definitely. It was also a Shukla paksha navmi. 4. The

Yajurveda says, “madhuschai madhavaschai vasantikav ritoo†i.e.

Madhu and Madhava are the months of Vasanta Ritu. Now if it

was Madhumasa, and if, against all the prevailing logic and reasons, we presume

that Mesha etc. rashis did exist in India in about 7300 BCE, then Madhumasa and

Sun in Mina---and not in Mesha----can exist simultaneously only if the sun is

in the so called sayana Mina Rashi! 5. If you

presume that it is a so called nirayana rashi, which “Vedic

astrologers†call euphemistically sidereal rashis, then we have to take

into account the Ayanamsha which is without any rhyme or reason linked to

precession by these very “Vedic astrologersâ€.

“almighty†Lahiri Ayanamsha as on December 4, 7323 BCE, the date of

birth of Bhagwan Ram as per Dr. Vartak, was, plus 103°-41’. It means the

“almighty†Lahiri sun would have to be somewhere in Karkata, even

if we presume that it was Madhumasa on December 4, 7323 BCE, which it was not

actually, as we shall see shortly! Thus linking

of Madhumasa-cum- Chaitra to a so called nirayana Mina or Mesha rashi as back as

7323 BCE is in itself a self-defeating premise even if we ignore other anachronisms

like Punarvasu nakshatra cum shukla paksha navmi of Madhumasa, with the moon in

Karkata and the sun in Mina/Mesha etc.! You have

also said, “DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not

question his findingsâ€. 6. We must

come out of the habit of taking “findings†of “authoritiesâ€

at their face value and not questioning their veracity! It is our blind faith

in Maya the mlechha’s dictum that the Surya Sidhanta was a “revelationâ€

by Surya Bhagwan that has landed the entire Hindu community in such a mess that

we are celebrating all our festivals on wrong days! If Dr.

Vartak had even an elementary knowledge of astronomy, he should have known that

if it was Madhu-cum-Chaitra masa, it could never have been so called sayana sun

in Mesha but only in Mina. As he also believes in so called sidereal rashis,

he should have known that a nirayana mina rashi in Madhu-cum-Chaitra would take

place only if it was away by about 180 degrees from Sayana Mina Surya i.e. about

72 multiplied by 180 = 12960 years before 285 AD, when the so called nirayana Lahiri

zodiac and the so called sayana zodiacs are supposed to have coincided! Thus “Vartak

Ram†should have incarnated in about 13000 BCE (and not in 7323 BCE) if

his sun was in Lahiri Mina, since it was only then that it could have coincided

with Madhu-cum-Chaitra! I may also mention

here that the actual longitudes of the sun, Moon and Rahu etc. on December 4,

7323 BCE were: Sayana sun was

actually about 18 degrees in Tula (about 2 degrees in Lahiri Kumbha)----as

against the Valmiki/AR sun either in Mina or Mesha according to you and other

jyotishis! Sayana Moon was

actually about zero degrees in Makar (about 13 degrees in Lahiri Mesha)---as

against Karkata Rashi as per the VR/AR etc. Sayana Mean

Rahu about two degrees in Mithuna (about 15 degrees in Lahiri Kanya)---as

against Mina Rashi of jyotishis! It was

Shukla Paksha Shashthi (and not navmi) besides Sayana Uttarashada and Lahiri

Magha nakshatra on December 4, 7323 BCE, without any corrections for Delta

Time. Even if we presume that the difference in Delta Time was about seven

days in 7000 BCE, things are not going to be much different! It was

neither the month of Madhu-cum-Chaitra nor Vasanta Ritu! Thus

everything on December 4, 7323 BCE was contrary to what is supposed to have

been given in the VR/AR and what Dr. Vartak claims to have deciphered on that

date! All the

above details can be checked from Vishnu.exe program that anybody can download

for free from hinducalendar forum and calculate vara (weekday), tithi,

nakshatra, yoga, karna and the longitudes of the sun, moon and mean Rahu (both

sayana and Lahiri) from 10000 BCE to 12030 AD in a jiffy! I,

therefore, think that we should close this Rama-janma-kundali prakran, since

there should not be any doubt in anybody’s mind now that the month of

Madhu-cum-Chaitra cannot go with the sun in Mina Rashi, unless it is a so

called sayana Mina Rashi, and “Vedic jyotishis†are not going to

accept it at any cost. We must also bear in mind that there were no Mesha etc.

rashis anywhere in the world in about 3000 BCE at the earliest, so to presume

that someone could have calculated Bhagwan Ram’s birth chart in 7323 BCE

is extremely farfetched, to say the least! It actually presents a very poor

picture of the entire Hindu community, as to how gullible we can be. THE JYOTISHA

JARGON ABOUT THE PLANETARY POSITION IN THE VALMIKI AND ADYATMA RAMAYANA IS THUS

AN INTERPLATION AND NOTHING BUT AN INTERPOLATION BY SOME GOOD FOR NOTHING

JYOTISHI. Gopal Krishna

ki jai. A K Kaul

,

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

wrote:

>

> Dear Goelji,

>

> Kindly have a look at the following analysis.

>

> 1)

> Dr. Vartak manually calculated the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth

from precessional data. He has given all these details in his book on the date

of Ramayana. One must give credit to him for that. For those interested in

Ancient Indian History this alone is sufficient as this date is corroborated by

the Surya-vamsha lineage given in the Puranas.

> 2)

> Dr. Vartak also mentioned about a Buddhist text which gives the time-gap

between the year of Lord Rama's going to Sri Lanka and the Parinirvana of

Lord Buddha. Dr. Vartak could not relate that date as he was not aware

that Lord Buddha passed away in 1807 BCE. At that time of writing his

book he was aware of the Max Mullerian date in the 5th century BCE only.

The year 1807 BCE as the date of parinirvana of Lord Buddha was worked

out by Late Kota Venkatachalam from the Puranic data and the work of

Prof. Narahari Achar using Astrological data and my own work from study of the

Dotted Record confirm the date of Kota Venkatachalam. Now it is seen that the

precessional data and the information from the Buudhist text quoted by Dr.

Vartak tallies.

>

> Now coming to the exact day from the astrlogical data I agree that it is a

contentious issue but by applying our mind we can sort out the issue from the

following analysis :

>

> 3)

> Lord Rama was born at noon. So the Sun was in the tenth house or

near the tenth house. If his ascendent is Cancer then the Sun has to be either

in the Arties or closest to the Aries.

> 4)

> Adhyatma Ramayana, a later day text from Purana, says that the Sun was

reaching Aries. It could mean that the Sun was closest to Aries.

> 5)

> Now if the Sun is closest to aries and the Moon is in Cancer then it means

that Lord Rama was born in a Shuklapaksha Navam and not Krishnapaksha Navami.

> 6)

> The Sun actually appears to be around 27 degree in Pisces. This

surprisingly means that Budha (Mercury) is in the nakshatra Revati, which it

rules. Astrologically speaking had the Sun been at the Aries (ie. in Lord

Rama's tenth sign) Kaikeyi would not have succeeded in taking away the kingship

from Lord Rama. It is another matter that he was born to take away Ravana from

the earth.

> 7)

> Five planets were in sva and / or uccha. The Moon and Jupiter in cancer

means the Moon was in Sva-hiouse and Juoiter in the house of exaltation. It is

quite possible that the Mars, Venus and Saturn could have been in sva- houes /

exalted. Now the Saturn's position can be found out if one knows the

approximate date as in the geo-centric model it takes the longest time among

the Grahas to move round the earth. From the precessional data Dr. vartak found

out the approximate year of Lord Rama's birth and that fixes the position of

saturn in Libra. So some unceratinty remains regarding the fast moving planets

Mars and Venus.

>

> Dr. Vartak did all calculations manually and gives full deatils of those

in his book. His is an open book and he found the year of Lord Rama's birth

closest to the date he arrived from the precessional data. But he too goofed up

regarding the position of the Sun. He took the Sun at Aries. The Buddist text

he quotes helps us find the date as 7329 BCE whereas Dr. Vartak arrived at the

date of 7323 BCE.

>

> This does not matter, as for the purpose of fixing the day for festivals

we have all the required data and the historian also cannot complain as they

get a figure, which fits in with all the puranic data The Puranic yuga

calculation also tallies with this date in the Treta yuga. To my mind Dr.

Vartak's date of Lord Rama is the best astronomical date found so far.

The date of Bharata and of Lakhna and Shatrughna is very clear. Bharat was born

in the Pushya makshatra and Mina Lagna, ie. late in the night following Lord

Rama's birth. It is interesting to see that he got the kingship as the Sun was

in his Lagna. Lakshmana and Shatrughna were born in the Ashlesh nakshatra

(ie. the Moon was in the Ashlesha Nakshatra) and at Sunrise (and that

means in in Cancer Lagna). This is for astrological discussions only

and the historians will not be interested in these finer details.

>

> Finally I would ike to submit that though I love astrology and picking up

the pebbles on the sea shore I look at the chrological matters more through the

historical ( that includes puranic records too) and astronomical data than

through astrology alone.

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

>

> --- On Thu, 10/8/09, gopal krishna goel g.k.goel

wrote:

>

> gopal krishna goel g.k.goel

> RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: Dating of Ramayana Period

> ancient_indian_ astrology,

,

vedic astrology,

vedic_research_ institute,

indiaarchaeology

> Thursday, October 8, 2009, 5:45 AM

 

> Dear BHATTACHARJYA JI,

> DR. Vartak is a well known authority and this mail is not

> question his findings. In any case this is an unending debate

> which never dies.

> I have some observations:

> Slola 1-18-8and 9 may mean as under:

> After completion of yajna and lapse of 6 seasons,Rama was born

> in 12th month of Chaitra , on ninth tithi(NAVAMIKE) ,

> in Punarvasu Nakshatra, five planets were in their own and exalted signs

> (SAVOCHCHASANSTHESH U)-THIS MAY MEAN THAT FIVE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR

> OWN EXALTED SIGNS OR THESE PLANETS WERE IN THEIR OWN AND/OR EXALTED SIGNS-

> cancer LAGNA WITH JUPITER AND Moon (VAKPATAVIDUNA SAH)

> THE following OBSERVATION can be made:

> 1. There may be some reasons to believe , but sloka does not say

that Rama was born

> in dark or bright half of the lunar month.

> 2. If it is assumed that SIDREAL lunar month of chaitra was refered

in the text.

> In that case Sun can be either inPisces or

Aries.

> 3. What was the method of counting of tithis in those days?Probably

mathematical tithi

> were not in use in those days.Even , diva and ratri karna.

> 4. What type of calander was in use in those days.Panch yugi calender was

in common use

> having 62 months of 30 solar days each.

> 5 If it is assumed that Five planets were in their exalted signs

then Sun ,Jupiter,

> Saturn, Mars and Venus were in exaltation signs.But if sloka

means that five planets were in

> own (sva) and Uchcha signs , Then their is no requirememt that Sun

should also be in Aries,

> In that case Moon , Jupiter,Saturn, Mars and Venus will meet the

requirement of

> of sloka regarding five planets.

> 6. In any case if Sun is in Aries , it is dificult to explain that

moon was in last pada of

> Punarvasu nakshatra in cancer.

> As regard following sloka:

>

> puShye jaataH tu bharato mIna lagne prasanna dhIH |

> saarpe jaatau tu saumitrI kuLIre abhyudite ravau || 1-18-15

>

> "The meaning are clear - After Sun rise (abhyudite ravau), Bharat was

born in

> pisces Lagna and Pusya Nakchatra.And two sons of Sumitra were born

> in aslesha nakshatra and cancer sign."

> It may be mentioned that 'Vakpati means Jupiter as well as Pusya

Nakshatra.

>

> This mail is just to seek clarifications on the points which are not clear

to me thus far.

> It would be intresting to know the parametres which Dr. Vartak fed in the

computer to arrive a particular date. At least that date can be relied upon

upto the extent and on the basis of these parameteres.

> Best regards,

>

>

> G. K. Goel