Historical question on Vedic Astrology- the Heterodox systems of Tantra, Jina et

[Guest guest]

Dear Satya Prakashji,Namaste,I read that paper quite sometime ago. Anyway I shall try to locate that article where you have said about the later-day origin of the Atharva Jyotisha. It appeared to me that the date was given as 500 BCE. The only thing is that I shall have to see a number fo files. I forgot the title of the paper / article / link. You said that you do not think that the "Vara" has come from the Greeks and that gives a great satisfaction.Regards,Sunil K. Bhattacharjya--- On Sun, 10/18/09, Dr Satya Prakash <backtocosmicroots wrote:Dr Satya Prakash <backtocosmicroots Historical

question on Vedic Astrology- the Heterodox systems of Tantra, Jina et Date: Sunday, October 18, 2009, 10:10 PM

 

 

 

Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya ji,

 

Namaste.

 

That's okay. There is nothing personal in this discussion. My main reason for objecting to your words is not your disagreement, but your misrepresentation of my words. I had to defend as well as clarify my stand as otherwise your misinterpretation of my article could be understood as my belief.

 

No. *Nowhere have I given any date to the Atharvana Jyotisha*. The only thing that I ever mention is that it does not belong to the early vedic period. Moreover I do NOT hold the belief that Vara (weekday) has been a Greek influence on Indian astrology. Let me explain myself. Whilst there has been an interaction between Hindu and Greek astrologies at some point of time, both were already in existence at that point. Indian astrology existed long before Parasara's magnum opus. In fact my own studies based on a multidisciplinary approach that includes not just Astronomy & Astrology, but Linguistics, Anthropology, Discourse Analysis, etc all of which have an overlap with Behavioural Sciences (Behavioural Sciences which is a multidisciplinary field is one of my major areas of expertise in which I run a teaching Institute affiliated to the Clinic) point to something else.

 

I do not wish to start another controversy here as I do not have the time to give the required lengthy explanations that link fragments from various areas. However I will quickly hint at some things. I will try to simplify the whole thing and avoid the details due to lack of time. Inevitably I am running the risk of another controversy by this oversimplification. If the reader is willing to go with the process and not get stuck with the details, here it is.

 

Note to the readers: Please do not get stuck with the words 'Aryan' and 'Dravidian' or use the following as confirmation of the Aryan invasion theory.

 

1. Much of the old argument feeds itself on the belief that Hinduism and the Vedic cultures are synonymous. If there is no mention of something in the vedic corpus some scholars conclude that the idea is borrowed from a foriegn non-Indian source.

 

2. However it has to be pointed that the Tantric/Proto- Agamic and Vedic traditions are both old enough and have *independant* as well as *interdependant* sources. Those who do not understand the antiquity of the Tantric/Proto- Agamic traditions see little beyond the Veda. However there could have been an older common source for the older Jina, later Bauddha and some older Hindu Yoga traditions that have disagreements with the vedic traditions. Most of these were non-vedic while some patterned themselves expressly as anti-vedic. Nevertheless they were all Indian traditions inspite of their non-vedic origins. These are all clubbed together in the orthodox Vedic context as the Nastika (Heterodox) traditions. Note that the orthodox Hindu definition of an atheist and theist is not based on belief in God, but by belief in the Veda; So you have Purva Mimamsa an orthodox Vedic system that does not believe in God!

 

3. Some of these heterodox, non-vedic Indian traditions have links with the *so called* Dravidian cultures too. And the so called Dravidian cultures in turn seem to share something with the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians. In fact there are some like Dr. R. Hall who contend that Mesopotamians themselves especially the Sumerians who are the older ones have been civilized by a migration from the Dravidian ethinc group from India. Migrations add more complexity to our already complex topic.

 

4. Much of what is Hinduism today has its roots in the Heterodox traditions of India as well. This holds true for Indian astrology too. Now coming to the starting point of our discussion- Whilst Greek astrology and Indian astrology seem to have had interactions directly and indirectly at a later period, there has always been an older astrological tradition in India that was not necessarily Vedic. The Greeks themselves entered the picture relatively late and probably owe much of their knowledge to these original sources that had by the time of the Greeks spread out to other areas of the globe.

 

5. Whether or not one sees sense in the above ideas depends on one's exposure to a few systems of knowledge. Leaving all this aside, though I am willing to give credit to the Greeks for a number of things it becomes clear from the above that the Greeks themselves are not the originators of certain ideas ascribed to them. Most of the traditions worldwide had other common sources of origin whether our own biases make us conclude that they are Dravidian/Tamilian or Tantric or Babylonian or from some other culture/tradition.

 

In conclusion I do not believe that the Vedic traditions are the only origins for current day Hindu beliefs and practices. There are Indian traditions outside the Vedic fold, some of them possibly older. These older traditions include the Heterodox systems such as Jina, Tantric and Dravidian traditions.

 

Don't know if this post of mine has done more to clarify or confound things further!

 

Regards,

Satya Prakash

 

 

ancient_indian_ astrology, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

>

> 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@ ...>

> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Historical question on Vedic Astrology

> ancient_indian_ astrology

> 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 ==

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > ============ ========= ========= ====

>

> >

>