Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Dear prANadAsa ji, //Yavanas were originally from the region between Persia and Afghanistan// That must be the situation during Mahabharata period. Let us not forget that Ionian refers to people of Ionia, i.e. people of Anatolia, Turkey. But it is also true that during Mahabharata period the people of Turkmenistan (Turkey) was known as Turushk and resided more north west to the Yavana kingdom (Ionian Kingdom) mentioned in Mahabharata. Ionia was invaded by many people and many people and cultures from there re-located in many other places. It is well possible that it was a new kingdom created by Ionians between Persia and Afghanistan is what is termed as Yavana by Mahabharata; by that time the Trushk (mentioned in Mahabharata) might have invaded/conquered ancient Ionia (Anatolia).Love and regards,Sreenadh , s s <freemorons wrote:>> Bhaskarji,> This concept of non-intellectuals being called as "yavanas" is new to> me....I think Yavanas were originally from the region between Persia and> Afghanistan (refer to the map here listing all kingdoms of the Mahabharata:> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/EpicIndia.jpg ).> > Is there any source for this new angle? Please let me know..> > hari smaraNs,> prANadAsa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Dear Sreenadh ji, Rahu when appears in significaton of the 7th house strongly, it indicates that the native will have a intercaste marriage. This does not define the caste. It may be Muslim, Christian or any other. In same way is the word " Yavana " used. Just do not include it to mean only Turkey. " Yavana " in Dictionary definition means a Greek or a Ionian as you rightly said. But it also means any foreigner, of barbarian approach. This also includes Europeans. " Yavanika " means a Greek or a Mohemmadan women . I have with me certain Sanskrit shlokas, and terms related to Yavanikas, but this is not my area to spend time over, so refraining from same. You are very right that anyone not a Brahmin was called a " Yavana " in that period of time. regards., Bhaskar. , " sreesog " <sreesog wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar ji, > //> So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey...// > The word Yavana originated from the word 'Ionia' (Anatolia, Turkey). > So it does originally refer to Turkish region (the enemies of > pre-Alexander Minovens, the people of Troy). They are not greeks but > much ancient than greeks and anti-greeks. They spoke an Indo-Europian > language very similar to ancient Sanskrit. It was very similar culture > that existed in Sindhu-Sarawaty civilization and Ionia during that > ancient past. Many cultures - such as Hittites, Armenians, Persians, > Indians, Greeks, and Arabs ruled this area during the ancient past > during various time periods in history. It is also possible that anyone > - whether it be Hittite, Armenian, Persian,Indian, Greek, Arab or what > ever - who ruled over Ionia (Anatolia, Tukey) was called Yavana by > indians during various periods in history. > Love and regards, > Sreenadh > > , " Bhaskar " > bhaskar_jyotish@ wrote: > > > > > > In Turkish language " Taji " means a strong horse. In astrology it may > > also mean " giving fast results " . But this does not mean that it is not > > necessarily Indian. Because no one can prove that it is not Indian. > > > > Parashar did not mix this. I do not wish to go into controversies > about > > who did what as not my area and not interested, but know this that > > " Tajik " in days of ancient India was practised by Non-Brahmins, and > > anybody who is non Brahmin was considered a Yavana in those days . > > > > So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey... > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Dear Sreenadh ji, Thanks for clarifying that I am in no way connected with Systems approach. Another clarification- I am also not a KP astrologer. I might add a longer note here. I am an Indian astrologer with an open mind and have studied KP, Arabic, Hellenistic, Modern Western, Chinese and Tibetan astrologies to whatever extent I could. I have spoken at Western astrology conferences too and have been influential in attracting a significant number of western astrologers to jyotish. In fact a number of them have learnt jyotish from me. One of my favourite topics that I often open with while addressing a gathering of western astrologers is 'Ashtamangala Prasna'. They are totally bowled over by the realisation that such a method is still in existence in India. As some of you might be aware of, Ashtamangala combines the rational and the non-rational, the objectivity of technical excellence as well as the magic of ritual. A simplified demonstration of Ashtamangala Prasna can convince most western astrologers. But the easiest way to initiate a dialogue between technically minded western astrologers and Jyotishis is through the use of Tajika which shares some similarities with medieval western astrology, more specifically Arabic astrology. I have no problem giving credit where it is due or even defending other schools as far as it is a question of the truth. Whilst the Babylonians and Greeks seem to have had a rich astrological tradition in the past they are no more fully alive. In that regard it is ONLY Jyotisha (traditional Indian astrology) that has been a continuous living tradition. Undoubtedly it is only Jyotish that has preserved its traditions through the Hindu way of life where Astrology and Astronomy are an integral part of everyday life whether people realise it consciously or not. You will not come across such a living tradition of astrology anywhere else in the world. Perhaps among the non-Indians, the Tibetans are relatively better in their attitude to astrology than the others though they lack the depth of Indian astrology. Traditional Tibetan medicine even includes astrology in its syllabus unlike modern Ayurvedic university syllabus in India. In fact I raised the same question at the 2nd International Ayurveda and Yoga conference this year at Sydney where I spoke on 'Daiva Cikitsa'. This conference had distinguished speakers such as Prof. Kulkarni, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Robert Svoboda etc. Daiva Cikitsa was originally one of the three approaches to therapy during Charaka's times. Astrology is an integral part of Daiva Cikitsa. In the postconference workshop I demonstrated through various case studies/astrological charts, the efficacy of Daiva Cikitsa. Such is the scope of Jyotisha or Indian astrology. Nowhere else do you have this unique advantage of a living tradition of astrology. ....As for KP, I do agree that it is an excellent methodology. I use the Ruling planets quite often among a host of techniques. I have even written an article on the Ruling planets. Sriman Krishnamurthi deserves credit for evolving a highly efficient methodology that is efficient in terms of the time invested. I do recommend KP to serious minded astrologers especially if they are research minded. However the problem with methodologies such as KP, is that in spite of their efficiency they are perhaps blind to many wonderful techniques in the ocean of traditional astrology. Let me quote from the first paragraph of my article 'Fixing a Muhurta'. quote starts- " It is perhaps for reasons like this, that genuine lovers of traditional jyotish are allergic to such methodologies. No man's methodology, whatever its advantages, can replace or stand up to the ocean of Jyotish . A wave just cannot replace the ocean. While I had always been open to testing any methodology outside conventional jyotish, I was always aware that the authors of such paddhathis/systems claimed unreasonable things at times. I never took their criticism about traditional astrology seriously. But a beginner takes them too seriously and misses out on a large and substantial part of the learning process. Such rebel or non-traditional methodologies may perhaps be fine for discussion with a well-grounded astrologer. But it is a very good idea for a beginner to stick to traditional, so as to avoid the common pitfalls. The average learner tries various methods with partial knowledge, hops from one author to the other, manages to catch pieces of information from each place and person, and eventually tries to make sense of those fragments. The result? His knowledge of astrology is quite often a mass of ideas-undigested, unassimilated and unharmonised - running riot in his mind! " - quote ends ....After you brought my attention to it, I realised that I had joined this group among a few other groups long back using another id which I used to previously use largely for astrological purposes. However I had forgotten about this group. It was only today that I rediscovered this group thanks to an email from somebody in this group. Anyway I will try to browse through the posts here whenever I get some time... Regards, Satya Prakash , " sreesog " <sreesog wrote: > > Dear Neelam ji, > // They would like to learn the benefits of systems approach // > Systems approach?!!! I think there is some confusion here! As far as I > know Satya Prakash ji is a KP astrologer having extensive knowledge > about various schools of astrology - both indian and western. He is an > astrologer from Hyderabad, AP, now settled in Austrelia - and a doctor > by profession. I never heard that he is an astrologer who is into > " Systems Approach (SA) " " Prof. VK Choudhry " !!! Certainly there must be > some misunderstanding - I think. > Love and regards, > Sreenadh developed by > > , neelam gupta > <neelamgupta07@> wrote: > > > > Respected Satya Prakash ji, > > > > Hearty welcome to the group. I take it as a Diwali blessing which has > added > > the glitter of your presence to the group. > > I request you to be an active participant in discussions for the > benefit of > > our members. They would like to learn the benefits of systems approach > by > > applying on examples taken up in the group. > > > > Warm regards > > Neelam > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Dear Mano j ji, I agree with your observations, and know that our Dear Sreenadh ji is a good man , a Good justificable Group owner, and a very balanced man. But at the same time, I notice certain references which do not seem proper to such a dignified perosn, for instance, about Rishi Parashar, , I cannot accept certain comments without proof, which cannot be provided, just by copy paste from various websites or such other references or inferences. Also about " Yavanas " there is no proof of what it actually means. I know what it means but then if somebody does not accept a dictionary definition then, I have to discuss further, or stop due to being obescieant to the Owner of this Group. Is this not quite natural ? You mentioned - //Only people who have been banned have been those who have been conciously rude and unrepentful AND not offering any useful and unselfish hints astrologically or unwilling to share with others in a respectful way.// Then why has not Utkal ji been asked to submit astrological logic and analaysis for what he mentioned about a member that he would come back to Delhi and also for some time spend in NCR ?????????? What is this nonsense going on here, under your eyes, and if you are also the Moderator then why are you being partisan, and biased by not speaking uptil now about Utkaljis utterances, but ready to jump on what I mentioned, by picking a statement from my mail ??? And beleieve me, I have nothing against Utkalji for I beleive his is a fake id, though he may be having some elementary knowledge about astrology, this does not give one the right to utter just anything without being questioned. Why were you silent uptil now? Why do you people just want to pamper Sreenadhji just for the heck of it, just like SS Moron did in his last post. regards/Bhaskar. , Manoj Chandran <chandran_manoj wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar Ji, > > // I cannot risk being thrown out of this Group, if I desire to stay here.// > > I am surprised and even schocked to see this line. We have seen several disagreements with Sreenadhi Ji in past with many posters. Infact even the Moderators are almost evenly divided on the subject of divisional charts. But we are all still here !!! We are all still voicing our opinions (albeit in a respectful way). So far I have not seen any body been thrown out of this Group for differing in an opinon with Sreenadh Ji. Only people who have been banned have been those who have been conciously rude and unrepentful AND not offering any useful and unselfish hints astrologically or unwilling to share with others in a respectful way. > > Regards, > -Manoj > > > > > > ________________________________ > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish > > Sun, October 18, 2009 10:48:39 AM > Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology > > > > Dear Sreenadh ji, > > The word " Yavana " is a Sanskrit word. Now if you think it has originated > from Turkey, then I need not argue with you but accept your statement, > Sir. You are the owner of this Group. I cannot risk being thrown out of > this Group, if I desire to stay here. > > Love and regards, > > Bhaskar. > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " sreesog " sreesog@ > > wrote: > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji, > > //> So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey...// > > The word Yavana originated from the word 'Ionia' (Anatolia, Turkey). > > So it does originally refer to Turkish region (the enemies of > > pre-Alexander Minovens, the people of Troy). They are not greeks but > > much ancient than greeks and anti-greeks. They spoke an Indo-Europian > > language very similar to ancient Sanskrit. It was very similar culture > > that existed in Sindhu-Sarawaty civilization and Ionia during that > > ancient past. Many cultures - such as Hittites, Armenians, Persians, > > Indians, Greeks, and Arabs ruled this area during the ancient past > > during various time periods in history. It is also possible that > anyone > > - whether it be Hittite, Armenian, Persian,Indian, Greek, Arab or what > > ever - who ruled over Ionia (Anatolia, Tukey) was called Yavana by > > indians during various periods in history. > > Love and regards, > > Sreenadh > > > > ancient_indian_ astrology, " Bhaskar " > > bhaskar_jyotish@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In Turkish language " Taji " means a strong horse. In astrology it may > > > also mean " giving fast results " . But this does not mean that it is > not > > > necessarily Indian. Because no one can prove that it is not Indian. > > > > > > Parashar did not mix this. I do not wish to go into controversies > > about > > > who did what as not my area and not interested, but know this that > > > " Tajik " in days of ancient India was practised by Non-Brahmins, and > > > anybody who is non Brahmin was considered a Yavana in those days . > > > > > > So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey... > > > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Bhaskarji,I understand your ranting about utkalji, for he made a claim without any basis. However, you yourself made a similar claim above (yavanas were non-brahmins) without a single source, and when I requested for it, you backtracked. You also mentioned something about them being mohammadan, but there were no mohammadans till nearly 3600 years after the MB was written. I did not point this and other instances out as you are a valuable member, and have provided very good insights in the past, and these may be simple errors - or , on the other hand, I may be too dumb to understand what is very simple in your opinion. To make judgments on people is very easy - I can easily sit here and note that a person who accepts and likes alcoholic drinks has no business even touching the shastras - much less jyotisha. But that is not my right. I am no one to judge, so I do not make that correlation. However, in the matter of your opinions, I find that although you make excellent sense 99% of the times, you have a predisposition to fawn over predecessors. Just because a person lived before us does not make that person right. Not all " puraNas " are authentic (ref: None of the Acharya-trayas accept all purANas, none of the 21-bhashyakAras have accepted them either). Only the 18 purANas authored and mentioned by VV himself can be considered as authentic. But I digress.....the point here is that we have slight ideological differences. We love and respect you Bhaskarji - you are like an angry but awesome uncle in this family....please do not leave us. :(hari smaraNs,prANadAsa (aka " SS Morons " ) On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: It is always better to have a friend who is a good critic then have 20 chamchas around one self. It is always better to have Krishna alongside, rather than have the army of Duryodhana or Krishnas army to fight against Krishna. Bhaskar always speaks the truth, and cannot stand any statement which is derogatory against any ancient rishi Muni or stalwarts in astrology who have proved themselevs to be somebody. Either he is allowed to stay and speak, or else asked politely to leave. the ball is in your court dear moderators. Bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Dear Bhaskar ji, All your arguments are correct. But if we look far behind at the original beginning of that word itself, then we can see that it originated from the word 'Ionia' . All the other meanings you mentioned including 'Greek' is of very very late origin. Neither Athens or Troy belongs to greeks, neither Illiod or Oddyssy belongs to Greek; Neither Minoven nor Crete civilizations belongs to Greek; Neither Hittite nor Anatolian culture belongs to Greek. Greek is a culture of very very recent origin - i.e. just after 8th century BCE. The same is true for the words like 'Yavana' - they DO NOT belong to the Greeks; but as a part of Gerater Indian (Maha Bharata) culture they belong to Asia (Jambu Dweepa) and Europe (Saka Dweepa). * Someone could say - Celtic culture is vedic or others may say Vedic culture is Celtic. * Someone could say - Sumerian culture is Agamic or others may say Indian Agamic culture is Sumerian. * Someone could say - Hittite language is Sanskrit like or others may say Sanskrit is Hittite language like. * Some one could say Siberian fire cult is Vedic or others may say Vedic fire cult is like Siberian filre cult. All these and many similar arguments holds good for many civilizations; we just need to remember that 'truth has many facets' - but the face we see depends on the place we stand! Love and regards,Sreenadh , "Bhaskar" <bhaskar_jyotish wrote:>> > Dear Sreenadh ji,> > Rahu when appears in significaton of the 7th house strongly, it> indicates that the native will have a intercaste marriage. This does not> define the caste. It may be Muslim, Christian or any other.> > In same way is the word "Yavana" used. Just do not include it to mean> only Turkey.> > "Yavana" in Dictionary definition means a Greek or a Ionian as you> rightly said. But it also means any foreigner, of barbarian approach.> > This also includes Europeans.> > "Yavanika " means a Greek or a Mohemmadan women .> > I have with me certain Sanskrit shlokas, and terms related to Yavanikas,> but this is not my area to spend time over, so refraining from same.> > You are very right that anyone not a Brahmin was called a "Yavana" in> that period of time.> > regards.,> > Bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Dear Bhaskar Ji, Your questions and comments regarding Sreenadh Ji's comments are his to answer. My only point is as a Member of this Group you have the right to your questions and I am sure Sreenadh Ji will give his point of view. Since neither you nor Sreenadh Ji are the "shy" type, there is no need to "hold back". Better to ask and seek clarification and reply. Regarding you point about Utkal Ji, it is every one's own perogative as what to share and what not to. Whether to explain their position of not is their own free will. In general if we share our astrological views and it is questioned/challenged by some one, it is up to the person who originally presented the view to augment their argument with. If they dont do that, then the next time they give their opinon, people may not take it too seriously. Ultimately this is a discussion group and it is up to the people to take it seriously or not. Neither the Moderators Not the Group Owner can police this. Regards, -Manoj Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Sent: Sun, October 18, 2009 11:43:30 AM Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology Dear Mano j ji,I agree with your observations, and know that our Dear Sreenadh ji is agood man , a Good justificable Group owner, and a very balanced man.But at the same time, I notice certain references which do not seemproper to such a dignified perosn, for instance, about Rishi Parashar, ,I cannot accept certain comments without proof, which cannot beprovided, just by copy paste from various websites or such otherreferences or inferences.Also about "Yavanas" there is no proof of what it actually means. I knowwhat it means but then if somebody does not accept a dictionarydefinition then, I have to discuss further, or stop due to beingobescieant to the Owner of this Group. Is this not quite natural ?You mentioned -//Only people who have been banned have been those who have beenconciously rude and unrepentful AND not offering any useful andunselfish hints astrologically or unwilling to share with others in arespectful way.//Then why has not Utkal ji been asked to submit astrological logic andanalaysis for what he mentioned about a member that he would come backto Delhi and also for some time spend in NCR ??????????What is this nonsense going on here, under your eyes, and if you arealso the Moderator then why are you being partisan, and biased by notspeaking uptil now about Utkaljis utterances, but ready to jump on whatI mentioned, by picking a statement from my mail ???And beleieve me, I have nothing against Utkalji for I beleive his is afake id, though he may be having some elementary knowledge aboutastrology, this does not give one the right to utter just anythingwithout being questioned. Why were you silent uptil now? Why do youpeople just want to pamper Sreenadhji just for the heck of it, just likeSS Moron did in his last post.regards/Bhaskar.ancient_indian_ astrology, Manoj Chandran<chandran_manoj@ ...> wrote:>> Dear Bhaskar Ji,>> // I cannot risk being thrown out of this Group, if I desire to stayhere.//>> I am surprised and even schocked to see this line. We have seenseveral disagreements with Sreenadhi Ji in past with many posters.Infact even the Moderators are almost evenly divided on the subject ofdivisional charts. But we are all still here !!! We are all stillvoicing our opinions (albeit in a respectful way). So far I have notseen any body been thrown out of this Group for differing in an opinonwith Sreenadh Ji. Only people who have been banned have been those whohave been conciously rude and unrepentful AND not offering any usefuland unselfish hints astrologically or unwilling to share with others ina respectful way.>> Regards,> -Manoj>>>>>> ____________ _________ _________ __> Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> ancient_indian_ astrology> Sun, October 18, 2009 10:48:39 AM> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology>>>> Dear Sreenadh ji,>> The word "Yavana" is a Sanskrit word. Now if you think it hasoriginated> from Turkey, then I need not argue with you but accept your statement,> Sir. You are the owner of this Group. I cannot risk being thrown outof> this Group, if I desire to stay here.>> Love and regards,>> Bhaskar.>> ancient_indian_ astrology, "sreesog" sreesog@>> wrote:> >> > Dear Bhaskar ji,> > //> So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey...//> > The word Yavana originated from the word 'Ionia' (Anatolia, Turkey).> > So it does originally refer to Turkish region (the enemies of> > pre-Alexander Minovens, the people of Troy). They are not greeks but> > much ancient than greeks and anti-greeks. They spoke anIndo-Europian> > language very similar to ancient Sanskrit. It was very similarculture> > that existed in Sindhu-Sarawaty civilization and Ionia during that> > ancient past. Many cultures - such as Hittites, Armenians, Persians,> > Indians, Greeks, and Arabs ruled this area during the ancient past> > during various time periods in history. It is also possible that> anyone> > - whether it be Hittite, Armenian, Persian,Indian, Greek, Arab orwhat> > ever - who ruled over Ionia (Anatolia, Tukey) was called Yavana by> > indians during various periods in history.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh> >> > ancient_indian_ astrology, "Bhaskar"> > bhaskar_jyotish@ wrote:> > >> > >> > > In Turkish language "Taji" means a strong horse. In astrology itmay> > > also mean "giving fast results". But this does not mean that it is> not> > > necessarily Indian. Because no one can prove that it is notIndian.> > >> > > Parashar did not mix this. I do not wish to go into controversies> > about> > > who did what as not my area and not interested, but know this that> > > "Tajik" in days of ancient India was practised by Non-Brahmins,and> > > anybody who is non Brahmin was considered a Yavana in those days .> > >> > > So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey...> > >> > > regards/Bhaskar.> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2009 Report Share Posted October 18, 2009 Dear Bhaskar ji, // It is always better to have a friend who is a good critic then have 20 chamchas around one self. ////> It is always better to have Krishna alongside, rather than have the army> of Duryodhana or Krishnas army to fight against Krishna.// I agree with it - but is it not possible for us all to co-exist? With the continuous exchange of views we all evolve together - right? //> Bhaskar always speaks the truth, and cannot stand any statement which is> derogatory against any ancient rishi Muni or stalwarts in astrology who> have proved themselevs to be somebody.// As far my reference to Sage parasara as modern sage is concerned, it was just a reference to Sambhu Hora prakash (Ch. 1 Sloka.7) quote bit "ParasaryaH sampratacharya samjnaH" meaning, "Parasara, the modern sage" only; and nothing else. Since we know that the ancient Parasara who wrote Parasara Samhita belonged to BC 1400 period, the truth of the above Sambhuhora prakash statement is questionable as well. //> Either he is allowed to stay and speak, or else asked politely to leave.// You can always stay and speak, who told you otherwise. But please avoid personal remarks against people other than me. You are free to make any personal remarks against me - and it will not cause any problem - because we know each other well. You know that I am good at heart, and I know that you are. Note: Utkal ji too is a knowledgeable and worthy friend. Please control your anger against him. Love and regards,Sreenadh , "Bhaskar" <bhaskar_jyotish wrote:>> > > > It is always better to have a friend who is a good critic then have 20> chamchas around one self.> > It is always better to have Krishna alongside, rather than have the army> of Duryodhana or Krishnas army to fight against Krishna.> > Bhaskar always speaks the truth, and cannot stand any statement which is> derogatory against any ancient rishi Muni or stalwarts in astrology who> have proved themselevs to be somebody.> > Either he is allowed to stay and speak, or else asked politely to leave.> > the ball is in your court dear moderators.> > Bhaskar.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Dear Satya Prakashji,Namaste,I could not reply to your mail earlier as I have read your mail late. I am selective in seeing my mails as in this part of New South Wales in Australia, where I am staying, my Internet is somewhat slow and we have a contract with the service provider and we cannot change it immediately either. But I generally do not miss Neelamji's mail and that is how I came to know about your mail, and came to know your id and finally found your mail. Yes I read about your saying that Vara is in Atharvana Jyotisha, which of late origin though I do not remember the exact words you have used. I am unable to locate your article now. Did you say in your article that the date of the Atharvana Jyotisha is around 500 BCE (which incidentally is the date of Atharvana Jyotisha given by the Pingrean Greekophiles like Shri Avatar Krishen Kaul, who on that basis conclude that Vara has come to India from the Greeks).Sorry if I have hurt you in any way and if you do not think that the Indians did noot know about the "Vara" to have come to Inidia from the Greek sources.Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Sat, 10/17/09, backtocosmicroots <backtocosmicroots wrote:backtocosmicroots <backtocosmicroots Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology Date: Saturday, October 17, 2009, 10:43 PM Sunil Bhattacharya ji and group, Namaste. I joined this group only today after someone posted a pdf document to my inbox. In the little time that I spent browsing through a few topics I came across the following post by you. I surely welcome anyone critiquing or criticising my ideas and thoughts as that is an accepted and healthy way to take the discussion further. However in your post you say that you have read one of my articles where I said that "the Atharvana jyotisha is not very old as it mentions Vara and that Vara has actually come to India from the Greeks". You write further, "These shallow pingrean scholars will not hesitate to demean the indian shastra at the drop of a hat and show their love for any outside india". I take strong objection to your words here as they are highly misleading and misrepresent my views. 1. I request you to give the reference where I have written the above. Is it possible that you either *misquoted me out of context* or remember my name on an article that I have never written! Please refer the following article http://www.karmicrh ythms.com/ pe20.htm wherein I have relied to a query in the postscript (at the ending) defending all the five limbs of the panchanga including the VARA as an integral part meant to be used in muhurta. 2. I am neither a pingrean scholar nor a greekophile as you suggest. I have done my bit in furthering the cause of the ancient Indian sastras in general and more specifically Jyotisha, Yoga sastra and Advaita for nearly seven years in Australia during which time I had served as the President of The Australian Council of Vedic Astrology (2001-04) as well as the Editor of the quarterly 'The Vedic Light'. 3. I am a self-respecting child of Bharata mata. I am not enamoured by the predominant consumerist worldview of the west or its ideals and am still in love with my country of origin, its roots, culture, and the sages. After doing three masters degrees equivalent training in a developed country and having travelled widely across the globe for training in fields related to Medicine, Health care and the Behavioural sciences, I chose to return back to India where I presently live and work. Let me inform you that I left Australia where me and my wife (both medical professionals) could have potentially made a million dollars per annum and chose to live in India where I don't make that sort of an income. Anyday I still remain proud of and grounded in the great legacy of India, be it vaidic, tantric, pauranic, bauddha or jina. 4. However I am also not the touchy, reactive, explosive Indian with a need to elevate India at every opportunity. I have no broken finger that hurts no matter what you touch. I love my mother and enjoy singing her glories. But it is a different matter that I don't have to idealise my mother or demean others' mothers to elevate my own mother. Obviously the reference here is to the motherland. Finally I prefer the balanced universality of Tagore's 'Religion of Man' over other reactive nationalistic religious approaches. In that regard my life too is a sustained search for a universal form of religious expression strongly rooted in the spirit of Indian tradition. I relpied to this post just to clear any misunderstanding/ misinterpretatio n of my thoughts/ideas. Please visit www.karmicrhythms. com for some of my articles on the ancient wisdom traditions of India. Most importantly may I request you to read a thrice published article of mine so that you may know my thoughts on Jyotisha in the historical context esp wrt the Greeks etc. My article "Jyotisha through the Ages" has been praised highly by the likes of Sriman K.N.Rao who even republished a longer version of the same article in his 'Journal of Astrology' The link to the article is given below. http://www.karmicrh ythms.com/ pe2.htm You may critique my ideas after going through the article. Regards, Satya Prakash ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote: > > Dear Sreenadhji, > > My opinion of Dr. Satyaprakash Choudhary is not very flattering, which is formed after I read one of his articles where he said that the Atharvana jyotisha is not very old as it mentions Vara and that Vara has actually come to India from the Greeks. These shallow pingrean scholars will not hesitate to demean the indian shastra at the drop of a hat and show their love for any outside india. Hats off to Max Muller and Sir Jones as they succeeded in creating generations of Indians who is more western than the westerners themselves. Firstly Dr. Satyaprakash did not care to to know whether the Vara is there or not in other shastras. Secondly even if he could not find it himself he did not hesitate to express a moment of doubt before he gave his verdict. Such is the pitiable conditions of the Bharata mata's children. > > Yesterday I read another mail, where a greeko-file expressed doubt over the date of Mahabharata saying that the Kali yuga is an invention of Mayasura and that that Mayasura concocted some astronomical positions and suggested the start of the Kali yuga in 3102 BCE. He completely ignores the puranic and the astronomical evidences apart from the calculations of the Saptarshi calendar and evidences given by Kalhana. > > He further says that Mayasura claimed to have learnt astrology from Surya Bahagwan, though to my knowledge it was Vivasvat, from whom Mayasura learnt astrology and there were more than one Vivasvat in the Surya vamsha. > > I think Bharat Mata will have to wait till one or two generations of distortionists leave the earth before she can see the truths prevailing. > > Regards, > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya > > > > --- On Fri, 10/16/09, sreesog <sreesog > wrote: > > sreesog <sreesog > > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Historical question on Vedic Astrology > ancient_indian_ astrology > Friday, October 16, 2009, 1:44 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear All, > I came across an informative conversation by Dr. Satya Prakash Choudhary ji in vedic astrology archives for the month Jan, 2003. Since it was very informative, I am presenting an edited version of the same here for the benefit of all. > Love and regards, > Sreenadh > ============ ========= ========= ==== > > > Historical question on Vedic > Astrology > > [Editor: The following is an > edited version of a conversation happened in vedic astrology during > Jan, 2003] > > Sundeep (vedicastrostudent) : > > I quite > accidentally drifted upon this article: > > http://www.astro. com/people/ hand_his_ e.htm > > > which quite > authoritatively seems to recognize that there is only a single origin of > astrology and that is in Mesopotamia (current Iraq ) > in the 2500 BC timeframe, from where it moved to Egypt , > and then Greece , > and then was introduced into India , > where it may have additionally and significantly evolved with much Indian > input. The main evidence is the use of Greek terms in Sanskrit which are > presumably guaranteed to be of Greek origin - thereby forcing the conclusion > that the knowledge came from Greece > to India not > the other way around. > > This brings up > the question (I know a lot of you have significant historical knowledge since > you frequently debate the birth time of Sri Krishna): > > What is the > oldest Indian astrological text and when was it written? Is it BPHS? Does it > use the Greek terms mentioned in the above article and does it's timing fit in > with the above evidence i.e. was it written after the earliest possible Greek > influence? > > Narasimha Rao (pvr108): > > Archaeology, > ancient history and comparative linguistics are not really sciences. They are > highly subjective fields where people are normally trying to connect dots and > imagining a lot of things. We hardly understand the evolution of civilization. > Was there a sophisticated civilization in world at 6000 BCE? History says no, > but it could be wrong. Nothing is conclusive in ancient history. > > In the light of > this uncertainty, all the discussions on the origin of astrology are futile (though > that doesn't prevent people from attempting it). > > It's funny that > 95% of the Sanskrit terms quoted in the article you referred to for planets, > signs etc are rarely used in Sanskrit texts. In Sanskrit literature, people are > not wedded to the concept of fixed names. Sun may be referred to Surya, Aditya, > Ravi , Vivasvan, Martanda or many other names (based on > which one fits the meter at a particular place). I have seen many names of Sun > used by Parasara, but I don't think I read anywhere in BPHS where Sun was > referred to as Heli, Venus as Asphujit, Mercury as Hermnan etc. > > Overall, I think > this particular article is manufacturing a lot of evidence. If one talks about > panaphara, apoklima etc, the point is reasonable. But the author is giving > obscure Greek-derived Sanskrit names of all planets and signs, which are not so > commonly used in astrological literature (definitely not in BPHS). They may > have certainly come to Sanskrit long after Parasara. That doesn't prove > anything. > > This approach of > looking at word similarities can be misleading. Similarity can work in both the > directions. Similarity can also mean that Greeks learnt from Hindus and > contributed back some research. The sophistication and the complexity of the > teachings of Parasara is perhaps 1000 times more developed than Greek astrology > of 400 BCE (or even Indian astrology of the same time). TO ME, it is silly to > suggest that Parasara's teachings came from Greeks. Parasara's teachings > must've decayed over several millennia/centuries and a fresh impetus from some > Greek/Hindu astrologers must've resulted in a rebuilding activity. Between the > times of Parasara/Jaimini and the time of Hindu-Greek collaboration, some decay > must've taken place, as Kali was setting in. > > Dr Satya Prakash Choudhary (satyaprakasika) : > > Quote > > It's funny that 95% of the Sanskrit terms > quoted in the article you referred to > for planets, signs etc are rarely used in Sanskrit texts. In Sanskrit literature, people are not > wedded to the concept of fixed names. Sun may be referred to Surya, Aditya, Ravi , > Vivasvan, Martanda or many other names (based on which one fits the meter at a > particular place). I have seen many names of Sun used by Parasara, but I don't > think I read anywhere in BPHS where Sun was referred to as Heli, Venus as > Asphujit, Mercury as Hermnan etc. > > But the author > is giving obscure Greek-derived Sanskrit names of all planets and signs, which > are not so commonly used in astrological literature (definitely not in BPHS). > They may have certainly come to Sanskrit long after Parasara. That doesn't > prove anything. > > Unquote > > The > Greek-derived Sanskrit names have probably little or nothing to do with > Parasara. If my memory is right most of them were introduced by VARAHAMIHIRA > who admired the yavanas and referred frequently to them. It remains a different > matter though whether BPHS was really authored 5000 years back or was compiled > by some inspired writer much later. > > I don't know > about terms like Kendra. Some suggest that even this word has no root word in > Sanskrit. Then Parasara too will be dragged into this. Perhaps Narasimha ji can > research on this (since you are much better than others with respect to > Sanskrit on this list) and tell us more. > > Quote > > Overall, I > think this particular article is manufacturing a lot of evidence. If one talks > about panaphara, apoklima etc, the point is reasonable. > > Unquote > > Yes some parts > are reasonable. But it is unreasonable to suggest that Indian astrology is > derived fully or even largely from the Greeks, though there is no denial that > some MUTUAL influence was there. > > Quote > > This approach > of looking at word similarities can be misleading. Similarity can work in both the directions. > Similarity can also mean that Greeks learnt from Hindus and contributed back > some research. > > Unquote > > There are many > things in Greek astrology that Indian astrology does not have. But as I said, > the only reasonable thing to say is that there *could have been a *mutual > influence, not that either is derived wholly or largely from the other. > > Quote > > The > sophistication and the complexity of the teachings of Parasara is perhaps 1000 > times more developed than Greek astrology of 400 BCE (or even Indian astrology > of the same time). > > Unquote > > 1000 TIMES IS AN > EXAGGERATION to say the least. Of course Parasara is the probably the greatest > among many. One just has to be awe struck within the *Indian context. > > But your above > statement only suggests that you have NOT studied Greek astrology at all. > Ancient Greek astrology is as sophisticated and as complex as Indian. > > The dashas? The > shadbalas? The fixed stars? The divisional charts? They too had all that, with > a few variations! While they don't have Ashtakavarga we too don't have a lot > that they had. Their fixed stars are much more complex than our *current texts > on nakshatras. > > Quote > > Parasara's teachings > must've decayed over several millennia/centuries and a fresh impetus from some > Greek/Hindu astrologers must've resulted in a rebuilding activity. Between the > times of Parasara/Jaimini and the time of Hindu-Greek collaboration, some decay > must've taken place, as Kali was setting in. > > Unquote > > But this is true > for the Greek sages too. The texts that are around are not the only ones. They > are also constantly discovering more about their ancients. So the same argument > could be extended to the Greeks too that a lot of their ancient teachings have > been lost. And it is kind of true. Their mythology is as fascinating and deep > as ours. Infact their mythology about Mercury is much more helpful ASTROLOGICALLY, > than ours (at least my opinion). > > They too had a > philosophical and spiritual basis for astrology. They too have a similar grand > view of astrology. The ancient Greeks too spoke of fate and prarabdha, gnana > and agnana, and the role of astrology as much as we do. > > The Corpus > hermeticum, the Platonists and Neo-Platonists, are all clear about the > following (they too speak of previous schools of thought and their sages just > as we do). > > According to > them the soul descends into matter from the higher worlds and that by its > descent into matter, it is subject to the limitations of 'Moira', the Geek word > for fate or whatever. The descent occurs through different stages, first the > UNDIFFERENTIATED, then through the sphere of the fixed stars, and eventually > through the seven planetary spheres. > > What is striking > here is that they hold that the soul is subject to "heimermane" only > from the sphere of Saturn (remember our lokaloka mountains beyond > Saturn?)Heimermane means "that which has already been allotted". > Sounds familiar? It is very much the same as our prarabdha. Now the soul is increasingly > subject to the natural law and is constrained by moira more as it descends down > through the remaining spheres. > > The soul > descends because of agnoia or ignorance. The soul learns the lessons through > pronoia ( i.e. acceptance of the planetary energies and Natural law, something > akin to the bhakta's surrender to God). The goal is Gnosis (knowledge) and > removal of Agnosis (ignorance). That again sounds like Vedanta with even the > terms being similar. > > Gnosis: Gnana > > Agnosis:Agnana > > There is a lot > more. But I do not have much time. All I would say is it is unfair to say that > Greek astrology is not as sophisticated or complex as Hindu astrology. It is a > different matter though about how exactly they influenced each other or whether > they had similar origins or whatever. I would remain NEUTRAL and take no sides. > Of course I identify more with Hinduism. But that does not prevent me from > either appreciating or studying other schools of thought. As I always say, > KNOWLEDGE is not any single country or race or culture's exclusive domain. > Neither is any one superior. It is only that each of us is acquainted with one > school deeply and get attached to it. All Knowledge is Saraswati. And a Mother > is a Mother, no matter what. As the Devi Mahatmyam affirms: > > ya devi sarvabhutesu > buddhirupens samsthita > > namastasyai > namastasyai namastasya namo namah > > To the Goddess > who is present in all creatures as Intelligence Salutations to Her. Salutations > to Her. Salutations to Her Again and again. > > Sudeep (vedicastrostudent) : > > Thank you for > your replies, PVRji and Satyaji, > > I understand > both your points. However, I do not think the writer of the article disputes > that there is a lot of ORIGINAL "research" in Vedic astrology. He > does seem to claim that the "seed" was planted by Greek influence - > after which he says or implies that a "period of isolation" allowed > Indians to germinate the original seed. > > In my viewpoint, > the proof that the original "seed" was Greek can logically only be > concluded if ALL of the following conditions are satisfied: > > 1) > The oldest Indian astrological text is available WITH > ITS ORIGINAL text. (Parenthetically, if this text is BPHS - do we know for a > fact that it has been passed down unchanged over the generations? ) > > 2) > This original text contains terms that are the same as > of contemporary Greek languages. > > 3) > These terms are verifiably of independent and > (uninfluenced) Greek origin (PVRji also pointed out that this has to be > proven). > > Only you Gurus > who can read the original Sanskrit can answer points 1 and 2. > > Dr Satya Prakash Choudhary (satyaprakasika) : > > I had so far > read only your and PVNRji's posts on this and the general line of thought and > fragments of the article referred to and your comments on them. My reply was > with reference to those fragments and PVNR's views because I am reasonably > conversant with some other schools of astrology as well to follow their > contentions. I have come across other articles on this kind of issues though. I > will read the actual article now. > > Narasimha Rao (pvr108): > > Quote > > The Greek-derived sanskrit names have probably > little or nothing to do with Parasara. If my memory is right most of them were > introduced by VARAHAMIHIRA who admired the yavanas and referred frequently > to them. > > Unquote > > Yes, you are > absolutely right. I hope you agree that Parasara existed way before > Varahamihira did, in which case India > astrology existed way before the Greek influence. > > According to the > Robert Hand article quoted by Sundeep, Hindus learnt astrology from Greeks and > did not know it until Greeks brought it to them. I was talking about Parasara's > texts in that context. Some of these guys say that Parasara came long after > Varahamihira (which is what you are hinting at below). > > Quote > > It remains a > different matter though whether BPHS was really authored 5000 years back or was > compiled by some inspired writer much later. > > I don't know > about terms like Kendra. Some suggest that even this word has no root word in > Sanskrit. Then Parasara too will be dragged into this. Perhaps Narasimha ji can > research on this (since you are much better than others with respect to > Sanskrit on this list) and tell us more. > > Unquote > > Yes, I will do > some research. But Kendra could easily have been derived from indra or some > other word (the indra - greatest and middle point - of a circle). We can only > speculate either way. > > Quote > > Overall, I > think this particular article is manufacturing a lot of evidence. If one talks > about panaphara, apoklima etc, the point is reasonable. > > Yes some parts > are reasonable. But it is unreasonable to suggest that Indian astrology is > derived fully or even largely from the Greeks, though there is no denial that > some MUTUAL influence was there. > > Unquote > > The issue is - > did this mutual influence come after Parasara taught the great science and > people almost forgot it or did this mutual influence come at the inception of > Hindu astrology. Robert Hand suggests the latter and I firmly believe in the > former. > > Quote > > The > sophistication and the complexity of the teachings of Parasara is perhaps 1000 > times more developed than Greek astrology of 400 BCE (or even Indian astrology > of the same time).1000 TIMES IS AN EXAGGERATION to say the least. Of course > Parasara is the probably the greatest among many. One just has to be awe struck > within the *Indian context. > > But your above > statement only suggests that you have NOT studied Greek astrology at all. > Ancient Greek astrology is as sophisticated and as complex as Indian. > > The dashas? The shadbalas? The fixed stars? > The divisional charts? They too had all that, with a few variations! While they > don't have Ashtakavarga we too don't have a lot that they had. Their fixed > stars are much more complex than our *current texts on nakshatras. > > Unquote > > Yes, I can > "1000 times" is an exaggeration. I can return your compliment by > saying "but your above statement only suggests that you have NOT studied > Parasara's teachings at all". But I will not get personal like you and > will keep the focus on the subject. > > Please note that > I am not just saying that Parasara's teachings are superior to the Greek > astrology of the last two millennia. I am also saying that they are also > superior to the Hindu astrology of the last two millennia (as taught by authors > from Varahamihira to Mantreswara) . > > Parasara's > teachings are not just about dasas, shadbalas, fixed stars and divisions. If > one reads BPHS fully, one can see how complete and brilliant-beyond- words it is > compared to ANY OTHER astrological text available today, Greek and Sanskrit. > > Regarding the > rest of your comments on the similarity between ancient Hindu astrology and > ancient Greek astrology: > > My guess is that > civilization existed for a long long time before what we currently know. My > guess is that astrological knowledge originated from the same source (which is > not babylon of 2000 BC or Greece > of 50 BC, but much earlier) and there was collaboration again around 100 BC-500 > AD as several cultures came together again. The similarities in cultures, > astrologies and even languages cannot be coincidences. Clearly, there are > missing links in the evolution of civilization. > > Dr Satya Prakash Choudhary (satyaprakasika) : > > I will not > address the contents of your mail that I could agree in principle to. I will > address those that I either don't agree to, or have something more to add upon. > > Quote > > Yes, you are > absolutely right. I hope you agree that Parasara existed way > > before Varahamihira did, in which case India > astrology existed way before the Greek > influence. > > According to > the Robert Hand article quoted by Sundeep, Hindus learnt astrology from Greeks > and did not know it until Greeks brought it to them. I was talking about > Parasara's texts in that context. > > Some of these > guys say that Parasara came long after Varahamihira (which is what you are > hinting at below). > > Unquote > > One need not > even go till Parasara's time to argue that predictive astrology existed in India > much before Varahamihira or even the 2-5 AD when astrology (Jataka) re-entered India > under Greek influences in whatever form. The Greek influences according to all > the western scholars who support that view entered India > between 2-5 AD. But even as far back as the 6th century BC one could show the > existence of Jataka in India . > Asita the court astrologer of Suddhodhana cast the little Siddhartha (would be > Buddha)'s chart and predicted two things. So even if someone proves any Greek > influences on Jataka or re-entry around 2-5 th AD, they still have a lot more > to address about this PRIOR EXISTENCE of Jataka in India . > > > > > > Oh no you have > misunderstood me. When I talk of an inspired writer compiling Parasara's > teachings much later around 5th AD or whatever, it is about the TEXT itself. I > have no doubts about Rishi Parasara (father of Vyasa) having existed much > earlier. Infact I have diligently gone through the Puranas and collected > references to him, while writing the story of Vyasa. Moreover Parasara is one of > the rishis in the parampara that I belong to. How can I question his existence > or the traditionally accepted date for rishi Parasara? > > But regarding > the *text itself I cannot say if the rishi's teachings were compiled much later > or whatever. But then the authoritativeness of the text stands questioned > because if a later author could have inserted any words of Greek origin (if at > all- this has to be proved after a multi-disciplinary research only; yet no > finding can perhaps be conclusive). If words like Kendra or Trikona too stand > questioned in addition to Apoklima, Panaphara etc, then it *could be that a later > author has either inserted or re-written or compiled the earlier teachings of > Parasara. If that be so, how could anyone be sure that this compiler did not > add some techniques too? > > My main point > here is that just because a text says something one cannot be sure of anything > definitely as rishi vakya. So except the Veda Samhita (that too only the > Samhita), I am not willing to accept anything as definitely unalterable rishi > vakyas. > > Let me cite one > instance. Some research the Puranas for astrological truths because Vyasa being > the great seer that he is, they believe that what the puranas reveal must be > unquestionable. But this is wrong. Most puranas that we read today have been > expanded from their original form. So is the case with the itihasas. The skanda > purana that 95% Indians read today is no more considered as the original or older > version by Vyasa. A much older and shorter version is in existence. The version > found in Nepal > and certain other places is the older one. During the golden period of Guptas > etc, most puranas were written again. So I cannot accept most texts in their > current form as full-fledged rishi vakyas. The case with the Veda Samhita is different. > I will write more elaborately on this another day regarding the Veda Samhita's > origin being undeniably rishi vakyas. > > Quote > > Yes, I will do > some research. But Kendra could easily have been derived from indra or some > other word (the indra - greatest and middle point - of a circle). We can only > speculate either way. > > Unquote > > Please do share > your findings/opinions. > > Quote > > Yes some parts > are reasonable. But it is unreasonable to suggest that Indian astrology is > derived fully or even largely from the Greeks, though there is no denial that some MUTUAL > influence was there. > > The issue is - > did this mutual influence come after Parasara taught the great science and > people almost forgot it or did this mutual influence come at the inception of > Hindu astrology. Robert Hand suggests the latter and I firmly believe in the former. > > Unquote > > Again I have to > bring in Asita as an example. As for Robert Hand, he is an authority on western > astrology to a certain extent. Though he seems to be acquainted with Vedic > astrology, he is not really deep into it to be able to make a judgment. While I > admire him for his technical brilliance and intellect with respect to western > astrology, his statements only show that his knowledge of Indian astrology is > not of an acceptable level. Undoubtedly he has researched into Arabic, Latin and > Greek works and should not "form definite opinions " about Hindu astrology > which is not his domain. > > Another point I > wish to submit is that Robert Hand is an intellectually honest astrologer to a > reasonable extent. The article could reflect an earlier opinion. Since I have > followed most of his works, I know for sure that he always keeps his mind open > and changes his opinion without being biased when the situation demands. If I > am not mistaken, of late he seems to be more neutral about the origins of Hindu > astrology. He was definitely biased a few years back just as most vedic > astrologers are biased against greek or arabic astrologies due to less > knowledge. > > I hope to be > able to meet him this year later through a common friend (a western > astrologer). If this happens I will be able to ascertain as well as put forward > my contentions. But I respect him for his work just as I respect any > professional scientist. > > Quote > > Yes, I can "1000 times" is an > exaggeration. I can return your compliment by saying "but your above > statement only suggests that you have NOT studied Parasara's teachings at > all". But I will not get personal like you and will keep the focus on the > subject. > > Please note > that I am not just saying that Parasara's teachings are superior to the Greek > astrology of the last two millennia. I am also saying that they are also > superior to the Hindu astrology of the last two millennia (as taught by authors > from Varahamihira to Mantreswara) . > > Parasara's teachings are not just about dasas, > shadbalas, fixed stars and divisions. If one reads BPHS fully, one can see how > complete and brilliant-beyond- words it > is compared to ANY OTHER astrological text available today, Greek and Sanskrit. > > Unquote > > I am sorry if my > expression hurt you. But it was not meant to be personal at all! And on the > other hand I should say that you are getting personal now! Calmly let us > consider this. Please tell me if you have studied Greek astrology and if so > which authors? Ancient or modern? If you haven't studied atleast 30% of their > practices, my statement stands true. So there is nothing to feel bad about my observation. > If you have studied let us discuss some points to see whether they are even 10 > or 50 times less sophisticated than us. > > But if you argue > that a lot of the original teachings have been lost and the current level of > jyotish is very inferior to the original one due to Kali yuga, then I have > something to say. If it is Kali yuga for us, it is Kali yuga for other races > too. Even other ancient cultures and races speak of a golden period or Satya > yuga and the current Kali yuga in their teachings. They too had their sages. What's > more? Some of our saints have been mentioned by them and like wise. To me the > word rishi does not have just an Indian or Aryan or Dravidian or Jain or Parsi > connotation. Some of our Puranas speak highly of the Sun-worshippers of Mitraic > or Zorastrian practices. The Tamil siddha tradition speaks of a great Chinese > siddha. > > And I firmly > adhere to the Hindu teaching that we are born with three runas or debts. The > debt towards the sages (rsi rna) is an important one that I deeply feel often. > That is the reason why I tried to write Vyasa and Parsara's story inspite of > the difficultness of the task. > > Sharing the > wisdom of the sages with others is one way we repay the debt. If not for them, > none of us would be discussing all this today. I feel the same way about the > sages of other traditions and cultures too because I am firmly convinced of the > commonness of humanity, its legacy, its heritage. > > Other races and > cultures too have had their rishis. They too had great knowledge in the ancient > times. And there seems to have been even some connections between all. And > logically too, life on this planet (forget human beings alone) cannot have had > different origins. We have a common ancestry. Just as all the different states > of India are > diverse in their own way, but yet united at one level; different ancient races > too have a unity. So when you said that Parasara's teachings are 1000 times > more complex and sophisticated than Greek astrology, I would defend our Greek > cousins, as much as I would defend the Indian contention if I were to meet > Robert Hand. But if you say that you are comparing Greek knowledge of 200AD and > the original teachings of Parasara, in fairness to the ancient Greeks, I will > say that you are putting oranges and apples in the same basket and should not > forget that they too believe in their ancient sages and Satya yuga. > > Finally > Vasishta, Sakti, Parasara, Vyasa and Suka are part of my rishi Parampara. My > daily prayers start with chanting the Advaita guru parampara verses. So I > worship and love them as much as you may love or defend Parasara. While I love > my Guru parampara more, I respect all paramparas and rishis (be they Greek or > Zorastrian or Jaina) equally. I will not prolong the discussion. > > == 0 == > > > ============ ========= ========= ==== > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Dear Pranadasaji and bhaskarji,I think there were brahmin Yavanas. Kalahana mentions about Yonabrahmins, who I understand were no other than Yavana brhmains. But opinions may vary.Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Sun, 10/18/09, s s <freemorons wrote:s s <freemoronsRe: Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology Date: Sunday, October 18, 2009, 12:38 PM Bhaskarji,I understand your ranting about utkalji, for he made a claim without any basis. However, you yourself made a similar claim above (yavanas were non-brahmins) without a single source, and when I requested for it, you backtracked. You also mentioned something about them being mohammadan, but there were no mohammadans till nearly 3600 years after the MB was written. I did not point this and other instances out as you are a valuable member, and have provided very good insights in the past, and these may be simple errors - or , on the other hand, I may be too dumb to understand what is very simple in your opinion. To make judgments on people is very easy - I can easily sit here and note that a person who accepts and likes alcoholic drinks has no business even touching the shastras - much less jyotisha. But that is not my right. I am no one to judge, so I do not make that correlation. However, in the matter of your opinions, I find that although you make excellent sense 99% of the times, you have a predisposition to fawn over predecessors. Just because a person lived before us does not make that person right. Not all "puraNas" are authentic (ref: None of the Acharya-trayas accept all purANas, none of the 21-bhashyakAras have accepted them either). Only the 18 purANas authored and mentioned by VV himself can be considered as authentic. But I digress..... the point here is that we have slight ideological differences. We love and respect you Bhaskarji - you are like an angry but awesome uncle in this family....please do not leave us. :(hari smaraNs,prANadAsa (aka "SS Morons") On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish@ .co. in> wrote: It is always better to have a friend who is a good critic then have 20 chamchas around one self. It is always better to have Krishna alongside, rather than have the army of Duryodhana or Krishnas army to fight against Krishna. Bhaskar always speaks the truth, and cannot stand any statement which is derogatory against any ancient rishi Muni or stalwarts in astrology who have proved themselevs to be somebody. Either he is allowed to stay and speak, or else asked politely to leave. the ball is in your court dear moderators. Bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Dear Prana dasji, // I understand your ranting about utkalji, for he made a claim without any > basis. However, you yourself made a similar claim above (yavanas were > non-brahmins) without a single source, and when I requested for it, you > backtracked. // 1) How can you equate my claim about " Yavans " to Utkaljis " atrocious oredictions without supporting evidence " ?. This is ridiculous. And by the way, can you disclaim my claims about the " Yavanas " ? 2)One source is a principal from a leading Astrological institution (Please do not ask me to take names as I do not wish to drag them in any controversies) whose personally written books is with me (Not to be sold) and you can come to my residence and have a reading. 3)Another source is (You should have taken the clue from my mail and done some homework), is the Sanskrit-English Dictionary written by Vaman Shivram Apte and published by Motilal Banarsidas. How ever smart we may be, but the Dictionary writers are always smarter than us. 4)I never backtrack in my Life. That is cowardice. I am not known to cowardice or such weak aspects of the human nature. 5) I am not relating the MB with Mohammedans or any such preposterous type of thinking. 6) About fawning over predessors, there is a point. Sage Parashar , Varahamihira etc and their contemporaries, are predecessors of one category, while KN rao, BV Raman, Santhanam fall in another category. The former were attuned very much to the superconsciousness and trying to find loose pockets in their clothes is something we are not capable or worthy of doing. About the latter category, I have no issues. 7) About the Puranas again we have no right, credibility or standing to comment. I have not yet finished and would be coming in intervals. best wishes, Bhaskar. , s s <freemorons wrote: > > Bhaskarji, > I understand your ranting about utkalji, for he made a claim without any > basis. However, you yourself made a similar claim above (yavanas were > non-brahmins) without a single source, and when I requested for it, you > backtracked. You also mentioned something about them being mohammadan, but > there were no mohammadans till nearly 3600 years after the MB was written. I > did not point this and other instances out as you are a valuable member, and > have provided very good insights in the past, and these may be simple errors > - or , on the other hand, I may be too dumb to understand what is very > simple in your opinion. > > To make judgments on people is very easy - I can easily sit here and note > that a person who accepts and likes alcoholic drinks has no business even > touching the shastras - much less jyotisha. But that is not my right. I am > no one to judge, so I do not make that correlation. > > However, in the matter of your opinions, I find that although you make > excellent sense 99% of the times, you have a predisposition to fawn over > predecessors. Just because a person lived before us does not make that > person right. Not all " puraNas " are authentic (ref: None of the > Acharya-trayas accept all purANas, none of the 21-bhashyakAras have accepted > them either). Only the 18 purANas authored and mentioned by VV himself can > be considered as authentic. But I digress.....the point here is that we have > slight ideological differences. > > We love and respect you Bhaskarji - you are like an angry but awesome uncle > in this family....please do not leave us. > > hari smaraNs, > prANadAsa (aka " SS Morons " ) > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotishwrote: > > > > > > > > > > > It is always better to have a friend who is a good critic then have 20 > > chamchas around one self. > > > > It is always better to have Krishna alongside, rather than have the army > > of Duryodhana or Krishnas army to fight against Krishna. > > > > Bhaskar always speaks the truth, and cannot stand any statement which is > > derogatory against any ancient rishi Muni or stalwarts in astrology who > > have proved themselevs to be somebody. > > > > Either he is allowed to stay and speak, or else asked politely to leave. > > > > the ball is in your court dear moderators. > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 // Note: Utkal ji too is a knowledgeable and worthy friend. Please control your anger against him. // Dear Sreenadh ji, Please also note that I have no anger against Utkal ji. I have found him to be a good man and knowledgable too. No issues here. It was just bcoz Shri ManojChandran ji pointed something from my mail, that I brought up the issue of "Impossible predictions through astrology" - issue, once again, and asked him why did he not ask for clarifications here. In the meanwhile if you notice, I had already put to rest the matter of Shri Utkaljis "unimaginable predictions" to rest, until my response was brought up. We, if we wish to be good astrologers, cannot and must never allow feelings of anger, hatred, jeaoulusy, inferiority, superiority, incompetency, to ever rise in our hearts and remain for long, or the heart woudl not be cleared for the divine inferences to come in, which much aid ana strologer. For me personally I allow such feelings home for a very short while, and do not nurture them. Therefore if you take me to a temple and ask me to say in fron of the Lord, I will say "Utkalji seems to be a good man" . Thats all. best wishes, Bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Dear Bhaskar Ji, Please continue to be yourself Bhaskar Ji. That was my only point (atleast when discussing with known friends in this group). With new people a little bit more caution is prudent (just like Sreenadh Ji said). Regards, -Manoj Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Sent: Sun, October 18, 2009 10:27:23 PM Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology Dear Manoj Chandran ji,You are a good man undoubetdly and have no issues with You. I respectyou for your fearlessness which I have witnessed in the past, and justhope that you allow me too, to remain on those same lines, when utteringor adhering to the truth.We need a force of lions around us. That makes us invincible. Not thatwe need to fight any mortals, but just the untruth.best wishes,Bhaskar.ancient_indian_ astrology, Manoj Chandran<chandran_manoj@ ...> wrote:>> Dear Bhaskar Ji,>> // I cannot risk being thrown out of this Group, if I desire to stayhere.//>> I am surprised and even schocked to see this line. We have seenseveral disagreements with Sreenadhi Ji in past with many posters.Infact even the Moderators are almost evenly divided on the subject ofdivisional charts. But we are all still here !!! We are all stillvoicing our opinions (albeit in a respectful way). So far I have notseen any body been thrown out of this Group for differing in an opinonwith Sreenadh Ji. Only people who have been banned have been those whohave been conciously rude and unrepentful AND not offering any usefuland unselfish hints astrologically or unwilling to share with others ina respectful way.>> Regards,> -Manoj>>>>>> ____________ _________ _________ __> Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish@ ...> ancient_indian_ astrology> Sun, October 18, 2009 10:48:39 AM> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology>>>> Dear Sreenadh ji,>> The word "Yavana" is a Sanskrit word. Now if you think it hasoriginated> from Turkey, then I need not argue with you but accept your statement,> Sir. You are the owner of this Group. I cannot risk being thrown outof> this Group, if I desire to stay here.>> Love and regards,>> Bhaskar.>> ancient_indian_ astrology, "sreesog" sreesog@>> wrote:> >> > Dear Bhaskar ji,> > //> So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey...//> > The word Yavana originated from the word 'Ionia' (Anatolia, Turkey).> > So it does originally refer to Turkish region (the enemies of> > pre-Alexander Minovens, the people of Troy). They are not greeks but> > much ancient than greeks and anti-greeks. They spoke anIndo-Europian> > language very similar to ancient Sanskrit. It was very similarculture> > that existed in Sindhu-Sarawaty civilization and Ionia during that> > ancient past. Many cultures - such as Hittites, Armenians, Persians,> > Indians, Greeks, and Arabs ruled this area during the ancient past> > during various time periods in history. It is also possible that> anyone> > - whether it be Hittite, Armenian, Persian,Indian, Greek, Arab orwhat> > ever - who ruled over Ionia (Anatolia, Tukey) was called Yavana by> > indians during various periods in history.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh> >> > ancient_indian_ astrology, "Bhaskar"> > bhaskar_jyotish@ wrote:> > >> > >> > > In Turkish language "Taji" means a strong horse. In astrology itmay> > > also mean "giving fast results". But this does not mean that it is> not> > > necessarily Indian. Because no one can prove that it is notIndian.> > >> > > Parashar did not mix this. I do not wish to go into controversies> > about> > > who did what as not my area and not interested, but know this that> > > "Tajik" in days of ancient India was practised by Non-Brahmins,and> > > anybody who is non Brahmin was considered a Yavana in those days .> > >> > > So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey...> > >> > > regards/Bhaskar.> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Dear Pranadas ji, // To make judgments on people is very easy - I can easily sit here and note that a person who accepts and likes alcoholic drinks has no business even touching the shastras - much less jyotisha. But that is not my right. I am no one to judge, so I do not make that correlation. // This is a good one. By the way which member from our Group indulges in alcoholic drinks and touches the shastras, I would like to know. Who invited you to the party, and not us ? First I will share some of the " SomaRasa " from him, and then give him the lecture of touching Shastras after drinking. Next time please take us along to such parties please. I promise I am not among those who will drink and then any Sahstras. regards/Bhaskar. Moderator Note: =============== We request you to stop this counter productive conversation/thread here itself. No personal remarks please - No name calling such as 'SS Moron' made by Bhaskar ji; and no personal references to alcoholic drinks etc as made by Pranadas ji would be appreciated. Any mail that continues this subject would be moderated/deleted. Moderator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Dear Chakroborty ji, Exactly. " Yavana " means actually a " foreigner " to us. Now what is " us " in the " context " of those times, and what is " foreign " , is a debatable issue, and not my domain of discussion as not knowledgable in this. But " Yavana " as meant as " Steed " in a foreign language and as meant as " foreign " in Sanskrit have a diversification after a common followed path. For the Bharmins of those days all those who were non Brahmins and practising methods of prognostications were known as " yavanas " . Even the followers of Nadi system were not held in good esteem by the Brahmins of those days and probably considered as " Rakshasa Vidya " . (I request the readers to spare me of any explanations on this). Thousands of years ago, there existed 4 different civilisations which grew on the banks of the Nile - the Tigris, the Euphrates, The Indus and the Hwang Ho. These are known as the Eqyptians, the Chaldeans, the Aryans (or the Hindus), and the Chinese respectively. How and where these 4 integrated on common grounds and then disnitegrated, is a issue I would much like to talk about and discuss, but as mentioned not my area, and have my own professional commitments with deadlines given to meet for love of money which is a necessary requirement of existence. Therefore cannot give wholesome time to such luxuries of research and discussions. But it is not that we are without knowledge or interest. That is certainly there to some extent. best wishes, Bhaskar. , " Chakraborty, PL " <CHAKRABORTYP2 wrote: > > Dear Sreenadh-ji, > > The word Yavana has been mentioned many a times in MBH, Manusmriti, > and even in RajTarangini. However, the exact meaning is still arguable, except > that they have regarded as fallen Kshatriya most of the times. > > Anyway, I am presenting a link which suggests that Yavana may not mean > related to Ionia only. 'Hope you would enjoy. > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/13298002/Yavanas-Are-Not-Greeks > > regards > > Chakraborty > > ________________________________ > sreesog [sreesog] > Sunday, October 18, 2009 9:26 PM > > Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology > > > > Dear Bhaskar ji, > //> So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey...// > The word Yavana originated from the word 'Ionia' (Anatolia, Turkey). So it does originally refer to Turkish region (the enemies of pre-Alexander Minovens, the people of Troy). They are not greeks but much ancient than greeks and anti-greeks. They spoke an Indo-Europian language very similar to ancient Sanskrit. It was very similar culture that existed in Sindhu-Sarawaty civilization and Ionia during that ancient past. Many cultures - such as Hittites, Armenians, Persians, Indians, Greeks, and Arabs ruled this area during the ancient past during various time periods in history. It is also possible that anyone - whether it be Hittite, Armenian, Persian,Indian, Greek, Arab or what ever - who ruled over Ionia (Anatolia, Tukey) was called Yavana by indians during various periods in history. > Love and regards, > Sreenadh > > , " Bhaskar " bhaskar_jyotish@ wrote: > > > > > > In Turkish language " Taji " means a strong horse. In astrology it may > > also mean " giving fast results " . But this does not mean that it is not > > necessarily Indian. Because no one can prove that it is not Indian. > > > > Parashar did not mix this. I do not wish to go into controversies about > > who did what as not my area and not interested, but know this that > > " Tajik " in days of ancient India was practised by Non-Brahmins, and > > anybody who is non Brahmin was considered a Yavana in those days . > > > > So Yavanas may not exactly mean, only people from Turkey... > > > > regards/Bhaskar. > > > > This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 I m sorry. regards, Utkal , " sreesog " <sreesog wrote: > > Dear Utkal ji, > I think a confusion caused by Neelam ji's words are handing around in > the air. As I know it, Satya Prakash ji is in no way related to the > Systems Approach (SA) developed by Prof. VKChoudhry. > Love and regards, > Sreenadh > > , " utkal.panigrahi " > <utkal.panigrahi@> wrote: > > > > The question of moment is, How -- new system's approach-- differs from > Parashara's system, other then it's presentation to be a new one. > > > > What additional capacity it has got in terms of predictivity, what > additional it can tell about a native? > > > > Sometimes, thirst for knowledge takes us to resources which further > confuse us, all that glitters is not gold, how it's possible that those > who see mesopotomia to be origin of jyotish are able to do anything good > in jyotish, jyotish being a divine subject, an honest heart is first > requirement, Unless somebody has regard for vedic values, his life in > jyotish is miserable , coz, in the moment when we are having confusions, > then only divine intution helps and if we dont have divine blessings, we > are stuck at that very point only. > > > > The kind of anti vedic, anti indian opiinon, they are making in > public, we develop doubts, if there is any true ability. > > > > Let's see what they offer. > > > > regards, > > Utkal. > > > > > > , neelam gupta > neelamgupta07@ wrote: > > > > > > Respected Satya Prakash ji, > > > > > > Hearty welcome to the group. I take it as a Diwali blessing which > has added > > > the glitter of your presence to the group. > > > I request you to be an active participant in discussions for the > benefit of > > > our members. They would like to learn the benefits of systems > approach by > > > applying on examples taken up in the group. > > > > > > Warm regards > > > Neelam > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.