Fwd: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

October 29, 2009

Dear Rohini,

I was hoping that Vinay will give a tough fight to Kaul and will eventually

expose the hollowness of the latter. Vinay is really competent in Suryasiddhanta

and Makaranda tables etc. and he was the right person to handle those issues. I

prefer to argue only on the issues related to history, Hindu astronomy and other

dharmashastras but not much on the issues in astrology as big astrology scholars

are there in these Jyotish fora.

1)

Kaul had not produced a single Greek book which contains all the nityy-gritties

of Indian astrology yet he claims that the Indians have learnt astrology from

the Greeks.

2)

All the grahas such as Mangal and Shani were known in the times of Mahabharata

more than five thousand years ago but it appears that he had not read the

Mahabharata properly yet. He goes on asking others to show him the Mangal and

Shani grahas in Vedas. He wants the grahas in those very same names in the

Vedas yet he himself quotes the Suryasiddhanta, where Surya is mentioned by the

name Bhanu. Such duplicity only Kaul is capable of.

3)

Rashis are there in the puranas for all to see and he had not read any of those

yet. He says the Rashis are imported from Greece.

4)

Baudhayana named the seven days after the seven planets yet Kaul says that the

Indians imported the Varas from the Greeks. Even the Atharvana Jyotisha mentions

the Varas. Without adducing any proof he says that Atharvana Jyotisha is of 500

BCE. If India would have had now a righteous king like Lord Shri Ram he would

have given Kaul the punishment that He gave to some people who went against the

shastras.

5)

Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad Gita that He is month of Margashirsha among

the months yet Kaul does not want to have the name of the Margashirsha in the

Hindu calendar. I wonder why Lord Krishna's Sudarshan is in shelf

now.

6)

Kaul rejects the twelve divisions of the zodiac as they are imaginary and does

not recognise why the divisions were made and named. He forgets that in that

case he must also reject his own name as that too is imaginary. He should also

must not assume other imaginary names like Jyotirved. His parents imagined the

name of Avtar and I am sure they did not obviously know whether it will be an

avtar of godness or evil.

7)

He cides the astrologers for calling the astrology Vedic. All ancient Indian

knowledge is Vedic. The puranas are called the fifth Veda. Before Vedavyasa

rearranged the Vedic literature into the four Vedas and the puranas all were

together called Veda. He has not read any of the Shastras. He read some quoted

pieces here and there and probably read the Dixit's book and wants the challenge

the Hindu scholarship with that meagre information. When I said the Manu had

mentionesd Astrology he wants that we

should tell him the references. Manu had told that the king should have

astrologer. He also barred the Vanaprasthi from practising astrology. When the

Dharmashastra says about the Astrology he goes on telling that the Hindus learnt

astrology from the Greeks. If you think about it seriously I am sure your blood

will boil.

8)

He calls Varahamihira the greatest charlaan as he thinks that Varaha mihira

copied from Greek text. There was no greek text available to Varahamihira and he

could have realised the true date of Varahamihira had he known the difference

between Varahamihira's mention of Sakendra kala and the Sakanta kala mentione d

by Brahmagupta. He thinks that what Dixit said is the last word in ancient

Indian chronology. Had Dixit been alive today he would have revised his opinion

himself on the chronological matters but his unworthy disciple Kaul would not.

9)

Varahamihira said that the yavana with knowledge of astrology has a respectable

status what then would be that of Brahman with knowledge of astrology. Kaul

mistranslated the Sanskrit verse to his advantage to belittle Varahamihira. Or

is it that he does not know sanskrit because very recently he gave a verse in

connection with the date of Lord Rama.

Kaul's unsubstantiated claims are endless and he is shouting from the rooftop

all these years, which compels me to guess that probably he thinks the Hindus

to be idiots.

Best wishes,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Thu, 10/29/09, rohinicrystal <jyotish_vani wrote:

rohinicrystal <jyotish_vani

Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

Thursday, October 29, 2009, 6:09 PM

Dear Vinay-jee,

Looking forward to your return, when the time and timing is right! You will know

when that is, I am certain!

Best regards,

Rohiniranjan

, " VJha " <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

> To Moderator :

>

> I joined this group in the vain hope of having discussions about

> astrology. But I have consistently been forced to waste my time on

> haters and abusers of astrology. I recently declared many times that I

> have no time to discuss non-astrological or anti-astrological topics

> with non-astrologers. Hence, I am now leaving this group for good of

> everyone, because my posts on astrological topics such as forecasts on

> stock prices evoke no response. Thanks.

>

> -VJ

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

> , " jyotishi " <raj@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Friends,

> >

> > I humbly request you to stop abusing each other. This is serving no

> purpose. The topic is great, but the discussion is lousy.

> >

> > I am forced to moderate now.

> >

> > raj

> >

> > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Kaul Ji,

> > >

> > > My statement was :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, because

> I

> > > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One cannot

> learn

> > > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you deliberately

> > > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and

> distort

> > > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not

> expressed in

> > > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but you

> > > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare tactics

> and

> > > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

> > > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in

> SIDDHAANTA

> > > skandha " .

> > >

> > > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you deny

> it

> > > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating in

> > > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

> > > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

> > >

> > > Your following statement is malafide :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and blowing

> your

> > > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered the

> > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

> of

> > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > sidhdanta jyotisha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I

> never

> > > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

> Whether

> > > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are not a

> > > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet you

> want

> > > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be under

> any

> > > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can

> answer

> > > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you are

> not a

> > > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your

> fitness

> > > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

> > > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean planets),

> which

> > > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in this

> > > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants to

> learn.

> > > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable persons,

> > > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

> > > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to

> learn,

> > > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

> > >

> > > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not going

> to

> > > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness for

> a

> > > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become a

> true

> > > learner (which you will never do).

> > >

> > > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why you

> fail

> > > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL

> TESTING

> > > ??

> > >

> > > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom and a

> > > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started abusing

> all

> > > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing to

> abide

> > > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your intellectual

> > > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

> > > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

> spreading

> > > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who is

> > > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

> required

> > > in making true planet from mean one.

> > >

> > > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The ball

> is

> > > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do not

> hope

> > > any change in your offensive language.

> > >

> > > -VJ

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

> > > , " jyotirved " <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

> > > >

> > > > Jai Shri Ram!

> > > >

> > > > Surprisingly, you are making additions to your own posts through

> your

> > > own

> > > > rejoinders! The post you have " replied " also is from you,

> addressed

> > > to me,

> > > > but you are replying it yourself!

> > > >

> > > > The long and short of your post as well as rejoinder is that,

> " Unless

> > > and

> > > > untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in SIDDHAANTA

> > > skandha of

> > > > Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for either learning Vedic

> > > Jyotisha or

> > > > participating in any shaastraartha " which means that as on date

> anyone

> > > who

> > > > is not a " parangata " in sidhanta skanda of jyotisha is not fit for

> > > learning,

> > > > much less practicing " Vedic Jyotisha " , and " participating in any

> > > shastrarta "

> > > >

> > > > In other words, according to you, all those jyotishis, who have

> not

> > > studied

> > > > and qualified the test of sidhanta skanda, but are calling

> themselves

> > > " Vedic

> > > > jyotishis " even then, are making false claims! So your post is

> aimed

> > > more

> > > > at those jyotishis than at me, since I am not calling myself a

> " Vedic

> > > > jyotishi " at all much less practicing it!

> > > >

> > > > Anyway, instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and

> > > blowing

> > > > your own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had

> answered

> > > the

> > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

> of

> > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > sidhdanta

> > > > jyotisha.

> > > >

> > > > At least pl. do explain as to how you calculated the ayanamsha of

> > > > " 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD " when it was zero for February

> 17/18,

> > > 3102

> > > > BCE, and with an oscillatory movement like a pendulum of the

> " chakra "

> > > @ 54 "

> > > > per year up to 27 degrees plus and minus! Was that ayanamsha of

> > > 22:38:44

> > > > plus or minus, i.e. whether it was to be added to the Surya

> Sidhanta

> > > > longitudes to make them so called nirayana or sayana or whatever

> or

> > > was it

> > > > to be subtracted from them and why? What is the relevance of

> > > ayanamsha in

> > > > the Surya Sidhanta?

> > > >

> > > > How are we supposed to have calculated eclipses or rising and

> setting

> > > of

> > > > planets etc. from the Surya Sidhanta if that sidhanta is only for

> > > " phalita

> > > > jyotisha graha-spashta " and not meant for calculating the planets

> of

> > > modern

> > > > astronomy?

> > > >

> > > > Though I was not surprised at all at your " bravery " by deleting

> even

> > > > " BVB6.doc " from your forum, since that post actually caught you on

> the

> > > wrong

> > > > foot because we are really celebrating all our festivals and

> muhurtas

> > > on

> > > > wrong days, much against the canons of the Puranas like Bhagavata,

> > > Vishnu

> > > > Purana, Vishnudharmotara Purana and even the sidhantas like the

> Surya

> > > > Sidhata etc., as they are all talking of Makar Sankranti being

> the

> > > > shortest day of the year and a Karkata Sankranti the longest day

> of

> > > the

> > > > year and so on! In other words, they are all talking of a so

> called

> > > sayana

> > > > Rashichakra instead of the so called nirayana rashichakra, whether

> of

> > > Lahiri

> > > > or Ramana or even the Surya Sidhanta, which you want the world to

> > > believe is

> > > > as per the shastras and the sidhantas, nay even the Vedas!

> > > >

> > > > I am again posting that BVB6.doc on your forum hoping against hope

> > > that you

> > > > will ponder on the facts adumbrated therein.

> > > >

> > > > I am also repeating all those fifteen points below and if you do

> not

> > > answer

> > > > them even then, all I can do is recite the shlokas of the Gita

> > > 2/35-36 for

> > > > you, which are:

> > > >

> > > > bhayad ranad uparatam mansyante tvam maharathah,

> > > >

> > > > yeshm chai tvam bahumato bhootva yasyasi laghavam

> > > >

> > > > avachya vadanshchai vadishyanti tavahitah,

> > > >

> > > > nindantastava samarthyam tato dukha taram nu kim

> > > >

> > > > Being a scholar extraordinary, I know you will be able to

> understand

> > > the

> > > > meaning of these shlokas from the Gita.

> > > >

> > > > Jai Shri Ram

> > > >

> > > > A K Kaul

> > > >

> > >

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

======\

> \

> > > ====

> > > > ===

> > > >

> > > > Excerpts from # 196 in Vedic Astrologyforum

> > > >

> > > > Would you kindly throw some light on the following points:

> > > > 1. Kindly demonstrate in a step by step manner scientifically as

> to

> > > how it

> > > > was

> > > > 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD? Is it plus or minus as on that

> date

> > > i.e.

> > > > whether it is to be deducted from the syana longitudes of modern

> > > astronomy

> > > > to

> > > > find the so called nirayana Surya Sidhanta longitudes just as

> Lahiri

> > > > ayanamsha

> > > > is subtracted to find Lahiri longitudes or do we have to add it

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta longitudes to find the Sayana longitudes from them,

> presuming

> > > that

> > > > the

> > > > SS longitudes are so called nirayana?

> > > > 2. If it is neither to be deducted from the sayana longitudes nor

> is

> > > it to

> > > > be

> > > > added to the SS longitudes etc, what is its relevance and why is

> to be

> > > > calculated at all? In other words, why has the Surya Sidhanta

> given

> > > these

> > > > three

> > > > shlokas of " trimshat kritya yuga bhanam.... " if they do not serve

> any

> > > > purpose at

> > > > all?

> > > > 3. Does it i.e. the ayanamsha have any relevance to modern

> astronomy

> > > > vis-a-vis

> > > > the Surya Sidhanta? I mean are we to work just with the Surya

> Sidhanta

> > > > calculations for preparing horoscopes alone but for calculating

> > > eclipses,

> > > > rising

> > > > and setting of planets or even the sunrise/sunset etc.etc., do we

> have

> > > to go

> > > > on

> > > > chanting the mantra " NASA sharnam gachhami " ? Does Surya Sidhanta

> > > ayanamsha

> > > > have any relevance to those " drik calculations " ?

> > > > 4. Which Surya Sidhanta are you talking about i.e. whether it is

> the

> > > one

> > > > that

> > > > is available in the market or is it a different one?

> > > > 5. If it is not available in the market, how do we get it or do we

> > > have to

> > > > go by

> > > > conjecture work?

> > > > 6. Is the Surya Sidhanta of Panchasidhantika in any way relevant

> to

> > > the

> > > > present

> > > > Surya Sidhanta or not?

> > > > 7. Who was the author of the Surya Sidhanta according to you and

> to

> > > whom was

> > > > it

> > > > revealed and when?

> > > > 8. What is the date of " creation/revelatio n " of the Surya Sidhanta

> > > according

> > > > to

> > > > you and why?

> > > > 9. How far are the durations of yugas and yuga theories of the

> Surya

> > > > Sidhanta

> > > > correct and reliable according to you? Did the Kali Era really

> start

> > > in 3102

> > > > BCE according to you since that is what the SS says in an indirect

> > > manner.

> > > > 10. The mean longitudes of the Surya Sidhanta, whether of the

> > > > Panchasidhantika

> > > > Surya Sidhanta, or the currently available one, do not tally AT

> ALL

> > > with

> > > > either

> > > > the so called Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara or any other Ayanamsha

> > > > longitudes,

> > > > nor do they tally with the so called sayana longitudes as per

> modern

> > > > astronomy.

> > > > What type of longitudes, as such, are there in the Surya Sidhanta

> and

> > > how

> > > > have

> > > > they been worked out?

> > > > 11. You have talked about Bhaskara-II vis-a-vis ayananamsha. The

> mean

> > > > longitudes of the Sidhanta Shiromani by Bhaskara-II as well do not

> at

> > > all

> > > > tally

> > > > with either Lahiri or Ramana or any other nirayana longitudes nor

> do

> > > they

> > > > tally

> > > > with the so called sayana longitudes as per modern astronomy! TO

> CROWN

> > > IT

> > > > ALL,

> > > > THEY DO NOT EVEN TALLY WITH THE SURYA SIDHANTA LONGITUDES neither

> at

> > > the

> > > > start

> > > > of kali Era nor at any other perioid! Why? Does it not mean that

> even

> > > > Bhaskara-II of around twelfth century had no faith in the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > calcuations?

> > > > 12 Same is the case with all the other sidhants including

> Aryabhati!

> > > No

> > > > sidhanta tallies with either modern astronomy--- whether nirayana

> or

> > > > sayana---nor

> > > > do they tally with one another for any era, except for the start

> of

> > > the so

> > > > called Kali Era, where Aryabhati (ardharatrika) , the Surya

> Sidhanta of

> > > > Pancha-sidhantika and mordern Surya Sidhanta sidhanta tally

> > > completely! The

> > > > longitudes at the start of Kali era also do not tally if we take

> the

> > > > audayika

> > > > system of Aryabhata--- that had been prevailing in India for a

> > > considerable

> > > > period! In other words, even Aryabhata had no faith in the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > longitudes, either to start with or later since he shifted from

> > > > " ardharatrika "

> > > > to " audayika " . Why?

> > > > 13. With such a confusion in the sidhantas themselves, which

> sidhanta

> > > should

> > > > we

> > > > believe and why----especially since all of them are wrong as per

> > > modern

> > > > astronomy and also as compaed to one another?

> > > > 14. Is there any difference between the calculated longitudes of

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta and the authoritative/ authentic statements in the same?

> E.g.

> > > > " Bhanor

> > > > makar sankranteh shanmaah, uttarayanam, karkyadestu tahtaiva syat

> > > shanmasah

> > > > dakshinayanam " . means that with the ingress of the sun into Makara

> > > Rashi,

> > > > the

> > > > six months of Uttarayana start and with the ingress of the sun

> into

> > > Karkata

> > > > Rashi, the six months of Dakshinayana start " . As per the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > calculations, this is an impossible situation. Surya Sidhanta

> Makar

> > > > Sankranti

> > > > does not at all coincide with the start of Uttarayana, nor does

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta karkata Sankranti coincide with the start of the six

> months

> > > of

> > > > Dakshinaya? How do you reconcile the two?

> > > > 15. There are quite a few statements in the Surya Sidhanta which

> talk

> > > of a

> > > > Tropical year i.e. a year related to the seasons and seasonal

> months,

> > > giving

> > > > an

> > > > impression that " Makar Sankranti is the shortest day of the year "

> and

> > > so on.

> > > >

> > > > Its calculations, however, yield some surprising results, which

> are

> > > correct

> > > > neither for a Tropical year nor for a sidereal year! They are just

> a

> > > sort of

> > > > imaginary year---and imaginary calculations- --which is

> scientifically

> > > most

> > > > inaccurate! Why

> > > >

> > > > End excerpts.

> > > >

> > >

> ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* *********

******\

> \

> > > ****

> > > > ************ ********* ********* ********* **

> > > >

> > > > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@

> > > >

> > > > Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

> > > >

> > > > Shri Kaul Ji and whoever maybe concerned with this not-so-useful

> post,

> > > >

> > > > Please do not get annoyed with my answers (Read my previous

> rejoinder

> > > in

> > > > this thread). You do not know you are raising wrong questions :

> the

> > > > proof of astrological accuracy of SS is ONLY the astrological

> > > (phalita)

> > > > test of its results, and not the positions of physical planets.

> Since

> > > > you are not ready to test SS astrologically, you will never know

> its

> > > > worth. As for me, I will never try to prove the worth of SS to a

> > > person

> > > > who has consistently abused it besides abusing all Vedic

> Jyotishis. I

> > > > know a large number of Vedic Jyotishis need births in criminal

> wards

> > > of

> > > > some central jail. But so are many practitioners of other trades.

> It

> > > > does not mean we should throw the baby with the bathtub.

> > > >

> > > > First think what you are. A former astrologer ? An evangelist ? A

> new

> > > > Buddha eager to enlighten others about the fraud of Vedic

> Jyotishis ?

> > > > What is your qualification ? I am not raising these questions to

> > > malign

> > > > you, but to draw your attention towards the entrance point of

> Vedic

> > > > Jyotish which you have jumped over without qualifying properly.

> That

> > > > point is SIDDHAANTA, which is the bed-rock of that variety of

> Jyotisha

> > > > which may be labeled as :

> > > > Indian/Vedic/ Bharatiya/ Subcontinental/ Whatever- you-call- it. I do

> not

> > > > care for the label, although I prefer " Vedic " owing to reasons I

> am

> > > not

> > > > willing to discuss here. Here, I am point towards the importance

> of

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Jyotisha. Why you do not think that I have

> > > > challenged you to solve some basic equations of SIDDHAANTA ,

> vowing

> > > > publicly that I will become your disciple in all respects if you

> > > > succedd? I know nobody in the world will help you in doing so. How

> do

> > > I

> > > > know it ??? Because I am a Vedic Jyotishi and I am PREDICTING

> > > > correctly that you will not succeed in solving the question raised

> by

> > > > me. So far, you have proven this prediction right by evading my

> > > > question.

> > > >

> > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > >

> > > > You may keep on building your castles in the air, but that will

> not

> > > > solve anything for you or for others. Astrologers do not take your

> > > views

> > > > seriously, and even if all anti-astrologers side with you, you

> will

> > > > never be able to impose a ban on Vedic Jyotisha in a democratic

> > > > society. Therefore, please give up warfare tactics and set down to

> > > > discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of discussion

> will

> > > be

> > > > decided by that person who qualifies in SIDDHAANTA skandha of

> Vedic

> > > > Jyotisha, because the questions you raise belong to this sphere.

> It is

> > > > the most difficult and secret skandha of Vedic Jyotisha ( " rahasyam

> > > > Brahma-samjnitam " ). It is time honoured rule of shaastraartha

> > > > (intellectual debate). Abusing " frauds " like me and " mlechchhas "

> like

> > > > my original Guru Maya the " reformed " Asura will not help you. I

> never

> > > > met Maya the " reformed " Asura as far as I know, yet it is part of

> > > > Rishi-Yajna to pay homage to originators of shaastras, and I pay

> > > homage

> > > > to Maya the " reformed " Asura by calling him my Guru in Jyotisha

> > > because

> > > > he gave the world many disciplines besides Jyotisha. He was not a

> > > Rishi,

> > > > but was indeed a teacher of great Rishis who learnt Jyotisha & c

> from

> > > > him. It is useless to discuss whether he was a superhuman being or

> > > not.

> > > > Such questions will not solve anything. Aristotle, the great Asura

> who

> > > > stole ideas of philistine sophists and got them killed, is reputed

> to

> > > > have said : the mark of genius is not the capability to solve

> great

> > > > questions, but to raise a genuine question, because humanity has

> guts

> > > to

> > > > solve any question now or later provided right questions are put

> forth

> > > > at right junctures. The proof of Aristotle being an unreformed

> clever

> > > > Asura lies in his name : Ari + stotra = The Praiser of Enemy (of

> > > > God/gods), ie The Praiser of Devil. So is the meaning of prefixes

> like

> > > > Ali, Ale, etc. I devoted decades on comparative linguistics, but

> later

> > > > found my findings will be opposed by all those members of Rascal

> > > > Societies and Ignoble Committees who create divisions in the world

> of

> > > > knowledge by distributing prizes which are worth less than a " bag

> of

> > > > potatoes " according to Jean Paul Sartre.

> > > >

> > > > Sir, no real sanyaasi has ever been defeated in shaastraartha by a

> > > > non-sanyaasi. A real sanyaasi is superior in shaastraartha not by

> dint

> > > > of superior bookish knowledge or other worldly traits, but by dint

> of

> > > > being the Chosen Lamb of God the Father Dyaus-Pitr (> Ju-piter).

> Each

> > > > real sanyaasi is a God-the-Son : Bhaagavata Purana says that God

> > > resides

> > > > secretly in every Jeeva, but is overtly manifest only to real

> > > sanyaasis.

> > > > Without practising brahmacharya like Ishu Shreshtha, you will not

> get

> > > > the blessing of Holy Mother. Brahmacharya is essential for all

> four

> > > > ashramas, including grihasthas (Lord Krishna said so in

> Mahabharata

> > > > during war between Arjuna and Ashvatthaama using brahmaastras) .

> > > > Brahma-vidya or " rahasyam Brahma-samjnitam " like SS cannot be

> obtained

> > > > otherwise. You are in your later ashrama but do not want to give

> up

> > > > comforts of grihastha ashrama. If you do not want to leave the

> > > comforts

> > > > of grihastha ashram even after crossing half of full Age, you are

> NOT

> > > a

> > > > Vedic brahmin youself, and therefore do not deserve the right to

> throw

> > > > stones at others, esp at those who follow Vedic Dharma in actual

> life.

> > > > Hence, either shut up or accept a fair shaastraartha (I know you

> will

> > > do

> > > > neither) on SIDDHANTA-JYOTISHA , and show me how you can solve

> > > > mandaphala equations of SS as in Makaranda Table. I will put up no

> > > > further question and will become your follower in every respect.

> Each

> > > > word of a Vedic Brahmin must be a promise.

> > > >

> > > > -VJ

> > > >

October 30, 2009

Sunil Da,

I had caught AKK in AIA red-handed in first half of January last year

when he computed ayanamsha wrongly with a tremendous error of 24 degrees

!! Then, he left the topic, and now he says he was not there, it must

have been some fake AKK !!

Now, I am not the member of AIA (I left five astrological groups and now

I am member in only two, yesterday I left two groups). Hence, I am here

reproducing my answer to AKK in AIA from my archive. It will prove

that AKK is a pseudo scholar, and it will also show why I left Jyotisha

Group : whenever I take hold of such pseudo-scholars, the moderator Mr

Raj steps in in the name of moderation , calling me an abuser !! Why Mr

Kaul cannot be forced to answer my single question about mandaphala

(equation of centre) ?? It will decide the issue who is a

pseudo-scholar. Why Mr Raj tries to save AKK ?? Ask him. Even if Mr Raj

repents, I will not rejoin that group. I am fed up with group politics,

it impedes my research works and other assignments. Here is proof of

AKK's " scholarship " and " sincerity " taken from AIA Jan 7, 2009 (my

intervention in debateen RNI and AKK):

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology

<http://us.mg4.mail./dc/%40.\

com> , " vinayjhaa16 "

> <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > I read the heated debate about ayanamsha, and was sorry to find a

> > supposedly scholarly debated stooping to such low standards. At

first,

> > I tried to keep away due to the foul language of Mr Kaul, but Mr A K

> > Kaul is determined to create a fuss about Vedic Jyotisha, esp about

> > Suryasiddhanta (SS henceforth), which he claims to have read but

could

> > not digest.

> >

> > I beg apology for my harsh words, but I am helpless. Mr A K Kaul

calls

> > Mr Sharan and all adherents of Vedic Jyotisha fools. Hence, I feel

it

> > necessary to bring to light the quality of his erudition. He says :

> > " If you take these shlokas , which are supposed to be referring to

> > precession/ayanamsh a as authentic and from the original Surya

> > Sidhanta, then for your information, the current ayanamsha as per

the

> > Surya Sidhanta is not -24 (minus twenty four) degrees as claimed by

> > Lahirwalas nor about 23 degrees as claimed by Shakuntala Devi but

+47

> > (plus forty seven) degrees! And for your further information, these

> > very " trimshat kritva... " shlokas have been quoted by Narada Rishi

> > (sic!) in Narad Purana,which is supposed to be an authority for

" Vedic

> > astrologers " but Gita Press Hindi translator/commenta tor has

> > interpreted those very shlokas in such a manner as to make the

> > ayanamsha equal to that of Lahiri! "

> >

> > Mr Kaul would not value commentaries by pandits, hence I am here

using

> > the commentary of Christian priest E Burgess :

> >

> > In a mahayuga of 4320000 years, there are 600 librations/trepidat

ions

> > of bha-chakra, one libration in 7200 years, upto a maximum of +/- 27

> > degrees. Nearly 3893109 years have passed since this mahayuga began

> > (mean mesha samkranti of 2009 AD). Hence, (3893109 / 4320000 =)

> > 90.11826263888889 % of a mahayuga has passed. Therefore, out of 600

> > librations in a mahayuga, 540.7095833333 librations have completed.

> > Leaving aside 540 complete librations, we are left with a fraction

> > 0.7095833333, which must be converted into degrees. How ?

> >

> > Multiply a full cycle with 3/10, you will get 108 degrees. It is one

> > full libration. It resembles a sinewave crudely, ie, having a

> > positive half cycle of 3600 years and an equal negative half-cycle.

> > First, ayanamsha rises from zero to +27 degrees, then gets down to

> > zero again. It is positive half-cycle. Then it moves to -27 degrees

> > and again to zero. This is negative half cycle.

> >

> > From the fraction 0.7095833333, let us substract 0.5 for the

positive

> > half cycle which ended in 499 AD, which was the zero date for

> > Aryabhatiya. Thereafter, negative half-cycle behan, which will

attain

> > its nadir of -27 degrees in AD 2299. We are left with 0.7095833333 -

> > 0.5 = 0.2095833333. Since one libration is equal to four quartets of

> > 27 degrees each, a total of 108 degrees, 0.2095833333 libration is

> > equal to - 22.635 degrees, or 22:38':06 " . it is negative.

> >

> > Surprisingly, Mr Kaul gets +47 instead of -23 degrees from God knows

> > where! An error of merely 70 degrees. No mean achievement by a

> > " scholar " who boasts thus : " I have read quite a few sidhants,

> > especially the SS with Sanskrit commentary Sudha Varshini by Pt.

> > Sudhakar Dwivedi, Hindi commentary by Mahavir Prasad Shrivastav and

of

> > course, the world famous Burgess translation! All the commentators

> > have declared unequivocally that Maya the mlechha had absolutely no

> > knowledge of precession. On the other hand, the world famous shlokas

> > trimshat kritva yuge bhanam... of the SS are an interpolation of a

> > much later date of about tenth century AD! That also has been

admitted

> > by all the comentators! "

> >

> > Mr Kaul is being deluded by wrong headed commentators like Reverend

> > Burgess or Mahavir Prasad. These commentators could not understand

the

> > intricate mathematics of SS. Burgess admitted that he could not

> > understand the logic behind four samskaras needed to make a true

> > planet out of mean. No commentator has ever published the real

> > forlulas. Non-believers in SS are denied this supreme knowledge of

> > jyotisha. Let Mr Kaul study SS before abusing its " topsy turvy

> > ayanamsha " .

> >

> > Maya was not a mlechchha, but an asura who attained brahma-jnana

> > ( " rahasyam brahma sammitam " , cf. last verse of SS) by means of

> > tapasya and taught Jyotisha to rishis. Asuras were also part of

Indian

> > culture, only their religion was anti-Vedic. But Maya worshipped

Vedic

> > god Surya and obtained, among other shastras, the ULTIMATE knowledge

> > about Jyotisha (brahma jnana).

> >

> > It is not my view, but the initial and final shlokas of SS say so.

> > Brahma jnana is not a mere knowledge of planetary positions,

otherwise

> > evry fool would obtain brahmajana by sitting at a computer or

visiting

> > a planetarium. Jyotisha is a non-physical science of hidden things

> > which guide destinies of men and nations, besodes weather & c.

Whether

> > SS is a text of brahma jnana or not can be tested only by a braha

> > jnani, not by a fool dependent on erroneous commentaries of Reverend

> > Burgess or his brown chelas like Mahavie Prasad.

> >

> > Mr Kaul says : " trimshat kritva yuge bhanam... of the SS are an

> > interpolation of a much later date of about tenth century AD! That

> > also has been admitted by all the comentators! " He is either lying

or

> > has no access to the meaning of SS and its commentaries.

> >

> > It is foolish to believe that the concept of ayanamsha is a later

> > invention. What modern commentators are failing to recognize is the

> > fact that ayanamsha has nothing to do with precession of equinoxes.

> > The latter has no relevance in Vedic Jyotisha based upon ancient

texts

> > like SS. Manjula wrote about precession. But SS has no use of it,

> > because SS has nothing to do with the material world. Its grahas are

> > deities of bhuvaloka, which could be seen by Maya only after

tapasya.

> > Proof of Vedic Jyotisha lies in the efficacy of its predictive part

:

> > phalita. Unfortunately, materialists are refusing to accept the

> > existence of a bhuvaloka of deities, and are hoping to get benefits

of

> > jyotisha at the same time! There are a lot of persons who use

> > physical astronomy in Ganita-Jyotisha, and Parashara of Jaimini in

> > Phalita, but such a " scientific " jyotisha is neither science nor

> jyotisha.

> >

> > I request Mr Kaul and others to stop abusing Surya Siddhanta and

test

> > its efficacy not by comparing it with physical astronomy but by

> > testing the predictive results according to BPHS & c. Lahirians are

> > destroying Vedic Jyotisha by killing its original Ganita, which has

> > made Phalita a gambling, resulting in a supposed need to reform

Phlita

> > as well !

> >

> > Aryabhatiya is a special text mixing tantra method of computing from

> > yuga's start with karana method of computing from nearest important

> > phenomena, which was zero ayanamsha in 499 AD. The karana tables of

> > Aryabhatiya have been lost, hence computing merely on the basis of

the

> > extant Aryabhatiya gives highly inaccurate values for any epoch. It

is

> > not a coincidence that Aryabhatiya uses the year of zero ayanamsha.

> >

> > His insistence that ayanamsha was a medieval invention means that

real

> > jyotisha started in medieval period. What Mr Kaul refuses to see is

> > that without ayanamsha, it will be impossible to compute sunrise,

> > ishtakaal, lagna (ascendant) and twelve bhaavas, declension, etc.

> >

> > SS has two aspects : Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha. First is the

> > mathematics of bhuvaloka needed in astrology, second deals with

> > physical world. Both aspects of SS were in full bloom, but due to

> > uselessness of Drikpaksha (ie, physical astronomy), its manuscripts

> > were not preserved. But all is not lost. All major astronomical

> > constants of modern astronomy can be deduced by means of

Saurpakshiya

> > mathematics, without any obcervation of heavenly phenomena. Salient

> > points of this Vedic Science was published in Hindi three years ago,

> > but is now our of print. It is being translated.

> >

> > Here, I am giving a simple instance of the magic of Suryasiddanta.

> > Paramkranti (max. declension) has a value of 24 degrees exactly in

SS.

> > Due to a 12 degree shift between Saurpaksha and Drikpaksha ecliptic

> > planes, you need to multiply Sine24 with Cos12 (or Sin78) degrees,

and

> > then take the arc of resultant, which is the maximum Drikpakshiya

> > declension of modern astronomy , 23:26':37.48 " . Now-a-days,

nutation

> > is negative. Substract nutation, and you will get absolutely

accurate

> > value of declension of modern physical astronomy. So simple, yet so

> > superb a science. Does the present generation of mankind deserve

this

> > divine gift (Suryasiddanta) ?

> >

> > But we must not use this drikpakshiya value in astrology, otherwise

we

> > will get wrong results in Phalita. That is what the likes of all

> > followeres of Lahiri are doing today.

> >

> > Suryasiddanta is infinite. It can give Mr Kaul more than he can ever

> > imagine. But not if he abuses its " topsy-turvy " things which he does

> > not understand, as is clear from his errors in computations shown

> above.

> >

> > Please take my words in a positive manner. Learn Suryasiddanta

before

> > abusing it. The published text is merely a tip of the iceberg.

> > Suryasiddanta is " RAHASYAM brahma-sammitam " , which has never been

> > given to a person who is not under an oath to observe lifelong

> > brahmacharya. There are other conditions as well, but brahmacharya

is

> > the first condition for getting " RAHASYAM brahma-sammitam " .

However,

> > materialists believe in nothing beyond this material world of

> > Phenomena (of five senses), they are blind to the Suryasiddhantic

> > world of Noumena.

> >

> > The Vedanga Jyotisha dating of 1400 BCE cited by Mr Kaul will be

dealt

> > with separately, to show the mathematical ineptitude of Colebrooke

and

> > his chelas. There is no real basis for 1400 BC, whatsoever.

> >

> > For the first time in my life, I have taught some Jyotisha to an

> > abuser of this divine science, for which I will have to undergo some

> > penance. That penance will come in the form of abuses from Mr Kaul

and

> > others, for which I am eagerly waiting, with a lot of love and

> sincerity.

> >

> > -VJ

> >

>

======================== ====

vedic astrology , Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Dear Rohini,

>

> I was hoping that Vinay will give a tough fight to Kaul and will

eventually expose the hollowness of the latter. Vinay is really

competent in Suryasiddhanta and Makaranda tables etc. and he was the

right person to handle those issues. I prefer to argue only on the

issues related to history, Hindu astronomy and other dharmashastras but

not much on the issues in astrology as big astrology scholars are there

in these Jyotish fora.

> 1)

> Kaul had not produced a single Greek book which contains all the

nityy-gritties of Indian astrology yet he claims that the Indians have

learnt astrology from the Greeks.

> 2)

> All the grahas such as Mangal and Shani were known in the times of

Mahabharata more than five thousand years ago but it appears that he had

not read the Mahabharata properly yet. He goes on asking others to show

him the Mangal and

> Shani grahas in Vedas. He wants the grahas in those very same names

in the Vedas yet he himself quotes the Suryasiddhanta, where Surya is

mentioned by the name Bhanu. Such duplicity only Kaul is capable of.

> 3)

> Rashis are there in the puranas for all to see and he had not read any

of those yet. He says the Rashis are imported from Greece.

> 4)

> Baudhayana named the seven days after the seven planets yet Kaul says

that the Indians imported the Varas from the Greeks. Even the Atharvana

Jyotisha mentions the Varas. Without adducing any proof he says that

Atharvana Jyotisha is of 500 BCE. If India would have had now a

righteous king like Lord Shri Ram he would have given Kaul the

punishment that He gave to some people who went against the shastras.

> 5)

> Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad Gita that He is month of

Margashirsha among the months yet Kaul does not want to have the name of

the Margashirsha in the Hindu calendar. I wonder why Lord Krishna's

Sudarshan is in shelf

> now.

> 6)

> Kaul rejects the twelve divisions of the zodiac as they are imaginary

and does not recognise why the divisions were made and named. He forgets

that in that case he must also reject his own name as that too is

imaginary. He should also must not assume other imaginary names like

Jyotirved. His parents imagined the name of Avtar and I am sure they did

not obviously know whether it will be an avtar of godness or evil.

> 7)

> He cides the astrologers for calling the astrology Vedic. All ancient

Indian knowledge is Vedic. The puranas are called the fifth Veda. Before

Vedavyasa rearranged the Vedic literature into the four Vedas and the

puranas all were together called Veda. He has not read any of the

Shastras. He read some quoted pieces here and there and probably read

the Dixit's book and wants the challenge the Hindu scholarship with that

meagre information. When I said the Manu had mentionesd Astrology he

wants that we

> should tell him the references. Manu had told that the king should

have astrologer. He also barred the Vanaprasthi from practising

astrology. When the Dharmashastra says about the Astrology he goes on

telling that the Hindus learnt astrology from the Greeks. If you think

about it seriously I am sure your blood will boil.

> 8)

> He calls Varahamihira the greatest charlaan as he thinks that Varaha

mihira copied from Greek text. There was no greek text available to

Varahamihira and he could have realised the true date of Varahamihira

had he known the difference between Varahamihira's mention of Sakendra

kala and the Sakanta kala mentione d by Brahmagupta. He thinks that what

Dixit said is the last word in ancient Indian chronology. Had Dixit been

alive today he would have revised his opinion himself on the

chronological matters but his unworthy disciple Kaul would not.

> 9)

> Varahamihira said that the yavana with knowledge of astrology has a

respectable status what then would be that of Brahman with knowledge of

astrology. Kaul mistranslated the Sanskrit verse to his advantage to

belittle Varahamihira. Or is it that he does not know sanskrit because

very recently he gave a verse in connection with the date of Lord Rama.

>

> Kaul's unsubstantiated claims are endless and he is shouting from the

rooftop

> all these years, which compels me to guess that probably he thinks

the Hindus to be idiots.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

> --- On Thu, 10/29/09, rohinicrystal jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> rohinicrystal jyotish_vani

> Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul

- 2

>

> Thursday, October 29, 2009, 6:09 PM

>

Dear Vinay-jee,

>

> Looking forward to your return, when the time and timing is right! You

will know when that is, I am certain!

>

> Best regards,

>

> Rohiniranjan

>

> , " VJha " <vinayjhaa16@ ...>

wrote:

>

> >

>

> > To Moderator :

>

> >

>

> > I joined this group in the vain hope of having discussions about

>

> > astrology. But I have consistently been forced to waste my time on

>

> > haters and abusers of astrology. I recently declared many times that

I

>

> > have no time to discuss non-astrological or anti-astrological topics

>

> > with non-astrologers. Hence, I am now leaving this group for good of

>

> > everyone, because my posts on astrological topics such as forecasts

on

>

> > stock prices evoke no response. Thanks.

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

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

>

> > , " jyotishi " <raj@> wrote:

>

> > >

>

> > > Dear Friends,

>

> > >

>

> > > I humbly request you to stop abusing each other. This is serving

no

>

> > purpose. The topic is great, but the discussion is lousy.

>

> > >

>

> > > I am forced to moderate now.

>

> > >

>

> > > raj

>

> > >

>

> > >

>

> > > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Shri Kaul Ji,

>

> > > >

>

> > > > My statement was :

>

> > > >

>

> > > > <<<

>

> > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

>

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

>

> > either

>

> > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

>

> > > > >>>

>

> > > >

>

> > > > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone,

because

>

> > I

>

> > > > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One

cannot

>

> > learn

>

> > > > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you

deliberately

>

> > > > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and

>

> > distort

>

> > > > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not

>

> > expressed in

>

> > > > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but

you

>

> > > > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare

tactics

>

> > and

>

> > > > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

>

> > > > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in

>

> > SIDDHAANTA

>

> > > > skandha " .

>

> > > >

>

> > > > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you

deny

>

> > it

>

> > > > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating

in

>

> > > > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

>

> > > > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Your following statement is malafide :

>

> > > >

>

> > > > <<<

>

> > > > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and

blowing

>

> > your

>

> > > > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered

the

>

> > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the

benefit

>

> > of

>

> > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata "

in

>

> > > > sidhdanta jyotisha.

>

> > > > >>>

>

> > > >

>

> > > > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I

>

> > never

>

> > > > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

>

> > Whether

>

> > > > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are

not a

>

> > > > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet

you

>

> > want

>

> > > > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be

under

>

> > any

>

> > > > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can

>

> > answer

>

> > > > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you

are

>

> > not a

>

> > > > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your

>

> > fitness

>

> > > > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

>

> > > > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean

planets),

>

> > which

>

> > > > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in

this

>

> > > > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants

to

>

> > learn.

>

> > > > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable

persons,

>

> > > > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

>

> > > > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to

>

> > learn,

>

> > > > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not

going

>

> > to

>

> > > > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness

for

>

> > a

>

> > > > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become

a

>

> > true

>

> > > > learner (which you will never do).

>

> > > >

>

> > > > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why

you

>

> > fail

>

> > > > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL

>

> > TESTING

>

> > > > ??

>

> > > >

>

> > > > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom

and a

>

> > > > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started

abusing

>

> > all

>

> > > > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing

to

>

> > abide

>

> > > > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your

intellectual

>

> > > > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

>

> > > > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

>

> > spreading

>

> > > > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who

is

>

> > > > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

>

> > required

>

> > > > in making true planet from mean one.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The

ball

>

> > is

>

> > > > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do

not

>

> > hope

>

> > > > any change in your offensive language.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > -VJ

>

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

>

> > > > , " jyotirved " <jyotirved@>

wrote:

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Jai Shri Ram!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Surprisingly, you are making additions to your own posts

through

>

> > your

>

> > > > own

>

> > > > > rejoinders! The post you have " replied " also is from you,

>

> > addressed

>

> > > > to me,

>

> > > > > but you are replying it yourself!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > The long and short of your post as well as rejoinder is that,

>

> > " Unless

>

> > > > and

>

> > > > > untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

SIDDHAANTA

>

> > > > skandha of

>

> > > > > Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for either learning

Vedic

>

> > > > Jyotisha or

>

> > > > > participating in any shaastraartha " which means that as on

date

>

> > anyone

>

> > > > who

>

> > > > > is not a " parangata " in sidhanta skanda of jyotisha is not fit

for

>

> > > > learning,

>

> > > > > much less practicing " Vedic Jyotisha " , and " participating in

any

>

> > > > shastrarta "

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > In other words, according to you, all those jyotishis, who

have

>

> > not

>

> > > > studied

>

> > > > > and qualified the test of sidhanta skanda, but are calling

>

> > themselves

>

> > > > " Vedic

>

> > > > > jyotishis " even then, are making false claims! So your post

is

>

> > aimed

>

> > > > more

>

> > > > > at those jyotishis than at me, since I am not calling myself a

>

> > " Vedic

>

> > > > > jyotishi " at all much less practicing it!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Anyway, instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match

and

>

> > > > blowing

>

> > > > > your own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had

>

> > answered

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the

benefit

>

> > of

>

> > > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata "

in

>

> > > > sidhdanta

>

> > > > > jyotisha.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > At least pl. do explain as to how you calculated the ayanamsha

of

>

> > > > > " 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD " when it was zero for

February

>

> > 17/18,

>

> > > > 3102

>

> > > > > BCE, and with an oscillatory movement like a pendulum of the

>

> > " chakra "

>

> > > > @ 54 "

>

> > > > > per year up to 27 degrees plus and minus! Was that ayanamsha

of

>

> > > > 22:38:44

>

> > > > > plus or minus, i.e. whether it was to be added to the Surya

>

> > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > longitudes to make them so called nirayana or sayana or

whatever

>

> > or

>

> > > > was it

>

> > > > > to be subtracted from them and why? What is the relevance of

>

> > > > ayanamsha in

>

> > > > > the Surya Sidhanta?

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > How are we supposed to have calculated eclipses or rising and

>

> > setting

>

> > > > of

>

> > > > > planets etc. from the Surya Sidhanta if that sidhanta is only

for

>

> > > > " phalita

>

> > > > > jyotisha graha-spashta " and not meant for calculating the

planets

>

> > of

>

> > > > modern

>

> > > > > astronomy?

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Though I was not surprised at all at your " bravery " by

deleting

>

> > even

>

> > > > > " BVB6.doc " from your forum, since that post actually caught

you on

>

> > the

>

> > > > wrong

>

> > > > > foot because we are really celebrating all our festivals and

>

> > muhurtas

>

> > > > on

>

> > > > > wrong days, much against the canons of the Puranas like

Bhagavata,

>

> > > > Vishnu

>

> > > > > Purana, Vishnudharmotara Purana and even the sidhantas like

the

>

> > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhata etc., as they are all talking of Makar Sankranti

being

>

> > the

>

> > > > > shortest day of the year and a Karkata Sankranti the longest

day

>

> > of

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > year and so on! In other words, they are all talking of a so

>

> > called

>

> > > > sayana

>

> > > > > Rashichakra instead of the so called nirayana rashichakra,

whether

>

> > of

>

> > > > Lahiri

>

> > > > > or Ramana or even the Surya Sidhanta, which you want the world

to

>

> > > > believe is

>

> > > > > as per the shastras and the sidhantas, nay even the Vedas!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > I am again posting that BVB6.doc on your forum hoping against

hope

>

> > > > that you

>

> > > > > will ponder on the facts adumbrated therein.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > I am also repeating all those fifteen points below and if you

do

>

> > not

>

> > > > answer

>

> > > > > them even then, all I can do is recite the shlokas of the

Gita

>

> > > > 2/35-36 for

>

> > > > > you, which are:

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > bhayad ranad uparatam mansyante tvam maharathah,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > yeshm chai tvam bahumato bhootva yasyasi laghavam

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > avachya vadanshchai vadishyanti tavahitah,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > nindantastava samarthyam tato dukha taram nu kim

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Being a scholar extraordinary, I know you will be able to

>

> > understand

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > meaning of these shlokas from the Gita.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Jai Shri Ram

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > A K Kaul

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > >

>

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

========= ======\

>

> > \

>

> > > > ====

>

> > > > > ===

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Excerpts from # 196 in Vedic Astrologyforum

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Would you kindly throw some light on the following points:

>

> > > > > 1. Kindly demonstrate in a step by step manner scientifically

as

>

> > to

>

> > > > how it

>

> > > > > was

>

> > > > > 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD? Is it plus or minus as on

that

>

> > date

>

> > > > i.e.

>

> > > > > whether it is to be deducted from the syana longitudes of

modern

>

> > > > astronomy

>

> > > > > to

>

> > > > > find the so called nirayana Surya Sidhanta longitudes just as

>

> > Lahiri

>

> > > > > ayanamsha

>

> > > > > is subtracted to find Lahiri longitudes or do we have to add

it

>

> > the

>

> > > > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta longitudes to find the Sayana longitudes from them,

>

> > presuming

>

> > > > that

>

> > > > > the

>

> > > > > SS longitudes are so called nirayana?

>

> > > > > 2. If it is neither to be deducted from the sayana longitudes

nor

>

> > is

>

> > > > it to

>

> > > > > be

>

> > > > > added to the SS longitudes etc, what is its relevance and why

is

>

> > to be

>

> > > > > calculated at all? In other words, why has the Surya Sidhanta

>

> > given

>

> > > > these

>

> > > > > three

>

> > > > > shlokas of " trimshat kritya yuga bhanam.... " if they do not

serve

>

> > any

>

> > > > > purpose at

>

> > > > > all?

>

> > > > > 3. Does it i.e. the ayanamsha have any relevance to modern

>

> > astronomy

>

> > > > > vis-a-vis

>

> > > > > the Surya Sidhanta? I mean are we to work just with the Surya

>

> > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > calculations for preparing horoscopes alone but for

calculating

>

> > > > eclipses,

>

> > > > > rising

>

> > > > > and setting of planets or even the sunrise/sunset etc.etc., do

we

>

> > have

>

> > > > to go

>

> > > > > on

>

> > > > > chanting the mantra " NASA sharnam gachhami " ? Does Surya

Sidhanta

>

> > > > ayanamsha

>

> > > > > have any relevance to those " drik calculations " ?

>

> > > > > 4. Which Surya Sidhanta are you talking about i.e. whether it

is

>

> > the

>

> > > > one

>

> > > > > that

>

> > > > > is available in the market or is it a different one?

>

> > > > > 5. If it is not available in the market, how do we get it or

do we

>

> > > > have to

>

> > > > > go by

>

> > > > > conjecture work?

>

> > > > > 6. Is the Surya Sidhanta of Panchasidhantika in any way

relevant

>

> > to

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > present

>

> > > > > Surya Sidhanta or not?

>

> > > > > 7. Who was the author of the Surya Sidhanta according to you

and

>

> > to

>

> > > > whom was

>

> > > > > it

>

> > > > > revealed and when?

>

> > > > > 8. What is the date of " creation/revelatio n " of the Surya

Sidhanta

>

> > > > according

>

> > > > > to

>

> > > > > you and why?

>

> > > > > 9. How far are the durations of yugas and yuga theories of the

>

> > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > correct and reliable according to you? Did the Kali Era really

>

> > start

>

> > > > in 3102

>

> > > > > BCE according to you since that is what the SS says in an

indirect

>

> > > > manner.

>

> > > > > 10. The mean longitudes of the Surya Sidhanta, whether of the

>

> > > > > Panchasidhantika

>

> > > > > Surya Sidhanta, or the currently available one, do not tally

AT

>

> > ALL

>

> > > > with

>

> > > > > either

>

> > > > > the so called Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara or any other

Ayanamsha

>

> > > > > longitudes,

>

> > > > > nor do they tally with the so called sayana longitudes as per

>

> > modern

>

> > > > > astronomy.

>

> > > > > What type of longitudes, as such, are there in the Surya

Sidhanta

>

> > and

>

> > > > how

>

> > > > > have

>

> > > > > they been worked out?

>

> > > > > 11. You have talked about Bhaskara-II vis-a-vis ayananamsha.

The

>

> > mean

>

> > > > > longitudes of the Sidhanta Shiromani by Bhaskara-II as well do

not

>

> > at

>

> > > > all

>

> > > > > tally

>

> > > > > with either Lahiri or Ramana or any other nirayana longitudes

nor

>

> > do

>

> > > > they

>

> > > > > tally

>

> > > > > with the so called sayana longitudes as per modern astronomy!

TO

>

> > CROWN

>

> > > > IT

>

> > > > > ALL,

>

> > > > > THEY DO NOT EVEN TALLY WITH THE SURYA SIDHANTA LONGITUDES

neither

>

> > at

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > start

>

> > > > > of kali Era nor at any other perioid! Why? Does it not mean

that

>

> > even

>

> > > > > Bhaskara-II of around twelfth century had no faith in the

Surya

>

> > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > calcuations?

>

> > > > > 12 Same is the case with all the other sidhants including

>

> > Aryabhati!

>

> > > > No

>

> > > > > sidhanta tallies with either modern astronomy--- whether

nirayana

>

> > or

>

> > > > > sayana---nor

>

> > > > > do they tally with one another for any era, except for the

start

>

> > of

>

> > > > the so

>

> > > > > called Kali Era, where Aryabhati (ardharatrika) , the Surya

>

> > Sidhanta of

>

> > > > > Pancha-sidhantika and mordern Surya Sidhanta sidhanta tally

>

> > > > completely! The

>

> > > > > longitudes at the start of Kali era also do not tally if we

take

>

> > the

>

> > > > > audayika

>

> > > > > system of Aryabhata--- that had been prevailing in India for a

>

> > > > considerable

>

> > > > > period! In other words, even Aryabhata had no faith in the

Surya

>

> > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > longitudes, either to start with or later since he shifted

from

>

> > > > > " ardharatrika "

>

> > > > > to " audayika " . Why?

>

> > > > > 13. With such a confusion in the sidhantas themselves, which

>

> > sidhanta

>

> > > > should

>

> > > > > we

>

> > > > > believe and why----especially since all of them are wrong as

per

>

> > > > modern

>

> > > > > astronomy and also as compaed to one another?

>

> > > > > 14. Is there any difference between the calculated longitudes

of

>

> > the

>

> > > > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta and the authoritative/ authentic statements in the

same?

>

> > E.g.

>

> > > > > " Bhanor

>

> > > > > makar sankranteh shanmaah, uttarayanam, karkyadestu tahtaiva

syat

>

> > > > shanmasah

>

> > > > > dakshinayanam " . means that with the ingress of the sun into

Makara

>

> > > > Rashi,

>

> > > > > the

>

> > > > > six months of Uttarayana start and with the ingress of the sun

>

> > into

>

> > > > Karkata

>

> > > > > Rashi, the six months of Dakshinayana start " . As per the Surya

>

> > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > calculations, this is an impossible situation. Surya Sidhanta

>

> > Makar

>

> > > > > Sankranti

>

> > > > > does not at all coincide with the start of Uttarayana, nor

does

>

> > the

>

> > > > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta karkata Sankranti coincide with the start of the six

>

> > months

>

> > > > of

>

> > > > > Dakshinaya? How do you reconcile the two?

>

> > > > > 15. There are quite a few statements in the Surya Sidhanta

which

>

> > talk

>

> > > > of a

>

> > > > > Tropical year i.e. a year related to the seasons and seasonal

>

> > months,

>

> > > > giving

>

> > > > > an

>

> > > > > impression that " Makar Sankranti is the shortest day of the

year "

>

> > and

>

> > > > so on.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Its calculations, however, yield some surprising results,

which

>

> > are

>

> > > > correct

>

> > > > > neither for a Tropical year nor for a sidereal year! They are

just

>

> > a

>

> > > > sort of

>

> > > > > imaginary year---and imaginary calculations- --which is

>

> > scientifically

>

> > > > most

>

> > > > > inaccurate! Why

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > End excerpts.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > >

>

> > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* *********

********* ******\

>

> > \

>

> > > > ****

>

> > > > > ************ ********* ********* ********* **

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Shri Kaul Ji and whoever maybe concerned with this

not-so-useful

>

> > post,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Please do not get annoyed with my answers (Read my previous

>

> > rejoinder

>

> > > > in

>

> > > > > this thread). You do not know you are raising wrong questions

:

>

> > the

>

> > > > > proof of astrological accuracy of SS is ONLY the astrological

>

> > > > (phalita)

>

> > > > > test of its results, and not the positions of physical

planets.

>

> > Since

>

> > > > > you are not ready to test SS astrologically, you will never

know

>

> > its

>

> > > > > worth. As for me, I will never try to prove the worth of SS to

a

>

> > > > person

>

> > > > > who has consistently abused it besides abusing all Vedic

>

> > Jyotishis. I

>

> > > > > know a large number of Vedic Jyotishis need births in criminal

>

> > wards

>

> > > > of

>

> > > > > some central jail. But so are many practitioners of other

trades.

>

> > It

>

> > > > > does not mean we should throw the baby with the bathtub.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > First think what you are. A former astrologer ? An evangelist

? A

>

> > new

>

> > > > > Buddha eager to enlighten others about the fraud of Vedic

>

> > Jyotishis ?

>

> > > > > What is your qualification ? I am not raising these questions

to

>

> > > > malign

>

> > > > > you, but to draw your attention towards the entrance point of

>

> > Vedic

>

> > > > > Jyotish which you have jumped over without qualifying

properly.

>

> > That

>

> > > > > point is SIDDHAANTA, which is the bed-rock of that variety of

>

> > Jyotisha

>

> > > > > which may be labeled as :

>

> > > > > Indian/Vedic/ Bharatiya/ Subcontinental/ Whatever- you-call-

it. I do

>

> > not

>

> > > > > care for the label, although I prefer " Vedic " owing to reasons

I

>

> > am

>

> > > > not

>

> > > > > willing to discuss here. Here, I am point towards the

importance

>

> > of

>

> > > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Jyotisha. Why you do not think that I

have

>

> > > > > challenged you to solve some basic equations of SIDDHAANTA ,

>

> > vowing

>

> > > > > publicly that I will become your disciple in all respects if

you

>

> > > > > succedd? I know nobody in the world will help you in doing so.

How

>

> > do

>

> > > > I

>

> > > > > know it ??? Because I am a Vedic Jyotishi and I am PREDICTING

>

> > > > > correctly that you will not succeed in solving the question

raised

>

> > by

>

> > > > > me. So far, you have proven this prediction right by evading

my

>

> > > > > question.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure

in

>

> > > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit

for

>

> > either

>

> > > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > You may keep on building your castles in the air, but that

will

>

> > not

>

> > > > > solve anything for you or for others. Astrologers do not take

your

>

> > > > views

>

> > > > > seriously, and even if all anti-astrologers side with you, you

>

> > will

>

> > > > > never be able to impose a ban on Vedic Jyotisha in a

democratic

>

> > > > > society. Therefore, please give up warfare tactics and set

down to

>

> > > > > discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

discussion

>

> > will

>

> > > > be

>

> > > > > decided by that person who qualifies in SIDDHAANTA skandha of

>

> > Vedic

>

> > > > > Jyotisha, because the questions you raise belong to this

sphere.

>

> > It is

>

> > > > > the most difficult and secret skandha of Vedic Jyotisha

( " rahasyam

>

> > > > > Brahma-samjnitam " ). It is time honoured rule of shaastraartha

>

> > > > > (intellectual debate). Abusing " frauds " like me and

" mlechchhas "

>

> > like

>

> > > > > my original Guru Maya the " reformed " Asura will not help you.

I

>

> > never

>

> > > > > met Maya the " reformed " Asura as far as I know, yet it is part

of

>

> > > > > Rishi-Yajna to pay homage to originators of shaastras, and I

pay

>

> > > > homage

>

> > > > > to Maya the " reformed " Asura by calling him my Guru in

Jyotisha

>

> > > > because

>

> > > > > he gave the world many disciplines besides Jyotisha. He was

not a

>

> > > > Rishi,

>

> > > > > but was indeed a teacher of great Rishis who learnt Jyotisha

& c

>

> > from

>

> > > > > him. It is useless to discuss whether he was a superhuman

being or

>

> > > > not.

>

> > > > > Such questions will not solve anything. Aristotle, the great

Asura

>

> > who

>

> > > > > stole ideas of philistine sophists and got them killed, is

reputed

>

> > to

>

> > > > > have said : the mark of genius is not the capability to solve

>

> > great

>

> > > > > questions, but to raise a genuine question, because humanity

has

>

> > guts

>

> > > > to

>

> > > > > solve any question now or later provided right questions are

put

>

> > forth

>

> > > > > at right junctures. The proof of Aristotle being an unreformed

>

> > clever

>

> > > > > Asura lies in his name : Ari + stotra = The Praiser of Enemy

(of

>

> > > > > God/gods), ie The Praiser of Devil. So is the meaning of

prefixes

>

> > like

>

> > > > > Ali, Ale, etc. I devoted decades on comparative linguistics,

but

>

> > later

>

> > > > > found my findings will be opposed by all those members of

Rascal

>

> > > > > Societies and Ignoble Committees who create divisions in the

world

>

> > of

>

> > > > > knowledge by distributing prizes which are worth less than a

" bag

>

> > of

>

> > > > > potatoes " according to Jean Paul Sartre.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Sir, no real sanyaasi has ever been defeated in shaastraartha

by a

>

> > > > > non-sanyaasi. A real sanyaasi is superior in shaastraartha not

by

>

> > dint

>

> > > > > of superior bookish knowledge or other worldly traits, but by

dint

>

> > of

>

> > > > > being the Chosen Lamb of God the Father Dyaus-Pitr (>

Ju-piter).

>

> > Each

>

> > > > > real sanyaasi is a God-the-Son : Bhaagavata Purana says that

God

>

> > > > resides

>

> > > > > secretly in every Jeeva, but is overtly manifest only to real

>

> > > > sanyaasis.

>

> > > > > Without practising brahmacharya like Ishu Shreshtha, you will

not

>

> > get

>

> > > > > the blessing of Holy Mother. Brahmacharya is essential for all

>

> > four

>

> > > > > ashramas, including grihasthas (Lord Krishna said so in

>

> > Mahabharata

>

> > > > > during war between Arjuna and Ashvatthaama using brahmaastras)

..

>

> > > > > Brahma-vidya or " rahasyam Brahma-samjnitam " like SS cannot be

>

> > obtained

>

> > > > > otherwise. You are in your later ashrama but do not want to

give

>

> > up

>

> > > > > comforts of grihastha ashrama. If you do not want to leave the

>

> > > > comforts

>

> > > > > of grihastha ashram even after crossing half of full Age, you

are

>

> > NOT

>

> > > > a

>

> > > > > Vedic brahmin youself, and therefore do not deserve the right

to

>

> > throw

>

> > > > > stones at others, esp at those who follow Vedic Dharma in

actual

>

> > life.

>

> > > > > Hence, either shut up or accept a fair shaastraartha (I know

you

>

> > will

>

> > > > do

>

> > > > > neither) on SIDDHANTA-JYOTISHA , and show me how you can solve

>

> > > > > mandaphala equations of SS as in Makaranda Table. I will put

up no

>

> > > > > further question and will become your follower in every

respect.

>

> > Each

>

> > > > > word of a Vedic Brahmin must be a promise.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > -VJ

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

October 30, 2009

Dear Vinay-jee,

Looking forward to your return, when the time and timing is right! You will know

when that is, I am certain!

Best regards,

Rohiniranjan

, " VJha " <vinayjhaa16 wrote:

>

> To Moderator :

>

> I joined this group in the vain hope of having discussions about

> astrology. But I have consistently been forced to waste my time on

> haters and abusers of astrology. I recently declared many times that I

> have no time to discuss non-astrological or anti-astrological topics

> with non-astrologers. Hence, I am now leaving this group for good of

> everyone, because my posts on astrological topics such as forecasts on

> stock prices evoke no response. Thanks.

>

> -VJ

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

> , " jyotishi " <raj@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Friends,

> >

> > I humbly request you to stop abusing each other. This is serving no

> purpose. The topic is great, but the discussion is lousy.

> >

> > I am forced to moderate now.

> >

> > raj

> >

> > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Kaul Ji,

> > >

> > > My statement was :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, because

> I

> > > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One cannot

> learn

> > > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you deliberately

> > > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and

> distort

> > > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not

> expressed in

> > > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but you

> > > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare tactics

> and

> > > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

> > > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in

> SIDDHAANTA

> > > skandha " .

> > >

> > > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you deny

> it

> > > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating in

> > > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

> > > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

> > >

> > > Your following statement is malafide :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and blowing

> your

> > > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered the

> > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

> of

> > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > sidhdanta jyotisha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I

> never

> > > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

> Whether

> > > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are not a

> > > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet you

> want

> > > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be under

> any

> > > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can

> answer

> > > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you are

> not a

> > > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your

> fitness

> > > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

> > > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean planets),

> which

> > > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in this

> > > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants to

> learn.

> > > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable persons,

> > > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

> > > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to

> learn,

> > > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

> > >

> > > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not going

> to

> > > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness for

> a

> > > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become a

> true

> > > learner (which you will never do).

> > >

> > > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why you

> fail

> > > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL

> TESTING

> > > ??

> > >

> > > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom and a

> > > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started abusing

> all

> > > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing to

> abide

> > > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your intellectual

> > > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

> > > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

> spreading

> > > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who is

> > > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

> required

> > > in making true planet from mean one.

> > >

> > > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The ball

> is

> > > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do not

> hope

> > > any change in your offensive language.

> > >

> > > -VJ

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

> > > , " jyotirved " <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

> > > >

> > > > Jai Shri Ram!

> > > >

> > > > Surprisingly, you are making additions to your own posts through

> your

> > > own

> > > > rejoinders! The post you have " replied " also is from you,

> addressed

> > > to me,

> > > > but you are replying it yourself!

> > > >

> > > > The long and short of your post as well as rejoinder is that,

> " Unless

> > > and

> > > > untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in SIDDHAANTA

> > > skandha of

> > > > Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for either learning Vedic

> > > Jyotisha or

> > > > participating in any shaastraartha " which means that as on date

> anyone

> > > who

> > > > is not a " parangata " in sidhanta skanda of jyotisha is not fit for

> > > learning,

> > > > much less practicing " Vedic Jyotisha " , and " participating in any

> > > shastrarta "

> > > >

> > > > In other words, according to you, all those jyotishis, who have

> not

> > > studied

> > > > and qualified the test of sidhanta skanda, but are calling

> themselves

> > > " Vedic

> > > > jyotishis " even then, are making false claims! So your post is

> aimed

> > > more

> > > > at those jyotishis than at me, since I am not calling myself a

> " Vedic

> > > > jyotishi " at all much less practicing it!

> > > >

> > > > Anyway, instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and

> > > blowing

> > > > your own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had

> answered

> > > the

> > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

> of

> > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > sidhdanta

> > > > jyotisha.

> > > >

> > > > At least pl. do explain as to how you calculated the ayanamsha of

> > > > " 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD " when it was zero for February

> 17/18,

> > > 3102

> > > > BCE, and with an oscillatory movement like a pendulum of the

> " chakra "

> > > @ 54 "

> > > > per year up to 27 degrees plus and minus! Was that ayanamsha of

> > > 22:38:44

> > > > plus or minus, i.e. whether it was to be added to the Surya

> Sidhanta

> > > > longitudes to make them so called nirayana or sayana or whatever

> or

> > > was it

> > > > to be subtracted from them and why? What is the relevance of

> > > ayanamsha in

> > > > the Surya Sidhanta?

> > > >

> > > > How are we supposed to have calculated eclipses or rising and

> setting

> > > of

> > > > planets etc. from the Surya Sidhanta if that sidhanta is only for

> > > " phalita

> > > > jyotisha graha-spashta " and not meant for calculating the planets

> of

> > > modern

> > > > astronomy?

> > > >

> > > > Though I was not surprised at all at your " bravery " by deleting

> even

> > > > " BVB6.doc " from your forum, since that post actually caught you on

> the

> > > wrong

> > > > foot because we are really celebrating all our festivals and

> muhurtas

> > > on

> > > > wrong days, much against the canons of the Puranas like Bhagavata,

> > > Vishnu

> > > > Purana, Vishnudharmotara Purana and even the sidhantas like the

> Surya

> > > > Sidhata etc., as they are all talking of Makar Sankranti being

> the

> > > > shortest day of the year and a Karkata Sankranti the longest day

> of

> > > the

> > > > year and so on! In other words, they are all talking of a so

> called

> > > sayana

> > > > Rashichakra instead of the so called nirayana rashichakra, whether

> of

> > > Lahiri

> > > > or Ramana or even the Surya Sidhanta, which you want the world to

> > > believe is

> > > > as per the shastras and the sidhantas, nay even the Vedas!

> > > >

> > > > I am again posting that BVB6.doc on your forum hoping against hope

> > > that you

> > > > will ponder on the facts adumbrated therein.

> > > >

> > > > I am also repeating all those fifteen points below and if you do

> not

> > > answer

> > > > them even then, all I can do is recite the shlokas of the Gita

> > > 2/35-36 for

> > > > you, which are:

> > > >

> > > > bhayad ranad uparatam mansyante tvam maharathah,

> > > >

> > > > yeshm chai tvam bahumato bhootva yasyasi laghavam

> > > >

> > > > avachya vadanshchai vadishyanti tavahitah,

> > > >

> > > > nindantastava samarthyam tato dukha taram nu kim

> > > >

> > > > Being a scholar extraordinary, I know you will be able to

> understand

> > > the

> > > > meaning of these shlokas from the Gita.

> > > >

> > > > Jai Shri Ram

> > > >

> > > > A K Kaul

> > > >

> > >

> ========================================================================\

> \

> > > ====

> > > > ===

> > > >

> > > > Excerpts from # 196 in Vedic Astrologyforum

> > > >

> > > > Would you kindly throw some light on the following points:

> > > > 1. Kindly demonstrate in a step by step manner scientifically as

> to

> > > how it

> > > > was

> > > > 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD? Is it plus or minus as on that

> date

> > > i.e.

> > > > whether it is to be deducted from the syana longitudes of modern

> > > astronomy

> > > > to

> > > > find the so called nirayana Surya Sidhanta longitudes just as

> Lahiri

> > > > ayanamsha

> > > > is subtracted to find Lahiri longitudes or do we have to add it

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta longitudes to find the Sayana longitudes from them,

> presuming

> > > that

> > > > the

> > > > SS longitudes are so called nirayana?

> > > > 2. If it is neither to be deducted from the sayana longitudes nor

> is

> > > it to

> > > > be

> > > > added to the SS longitudes etc, what is its relevance and why is

> to be

> > > > calculated at all? In other words, why has the Surya Sidhanta

> given

> > > these

> > > > three

> > > > shlokas of " trimshat kritya yuga bhanam.... " if they do not serve

> any

> > > > purpose at

> > > > all?

> > > > 3. Does it i.e. the ayanamsha have any relevance to modern

> astronomy

> > > > vis-a-vis

> > > > the Surya Sidhanta? I mean are we to work just with the Surya

> Sidhanta

> > > > calculations for preparing horoscopes alone but for calculating

> > > eclipses,

> > > > rising

> > > > and setting of planets or even the sunrise/sunset etc.etc., do we

> have

> > > to go

> > > > on

> > > > chanting the mantra " NASA sharnam gachhami " ? Does Surya Sidhanta

> > > ayanamsha

> > > > have any relevance to those " drik calculations " ?

> > > > 4. Which Surya Sidhanta are you talking about i.e. whether it is

> the

> > > one

> > > > that

> > > > is available in the market or is it a different one?

> > > > 5. If it is not available in the market, how do we get it or do we

> > > have to

> > > > go by

> > > > conjecture work?

> > > > 6. Is the Surya Sidhanta of Panchasidhantika in any way relevant

> to

> > > the

> > > > present

> > > > Surya Sidhanta or not?

> > > > 7. Who was the author of the Surya Sidhanta according to you and

> to

> > > whom was

> > > > it

> > > > revealed and when?

> > > > 8. What is the date of " creation/revelation " of the Surya Sidhanta

> > > according

> > > > to

> > > > you and why?

> > > > 9. How far are the durations of yugas and yuga theories of the

> Surya

> > > > Sidhanta

> > > > correct and reliable according to you? Did the Kali Era really

> start

> > > in 3102

> > > > BCE according to you since that is what the SS says in an indirect

> > > manner.

> > > > 10. The mean longitudes of the Surya Sidhanta, whether of the

> > > > Panchasidhantika

> > > > Surya Sidhanta, or the currently available one, do not tally AT

> ALL

> > > with

> > > > either

> > > > the so called Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara or any other Ayanamsha

> > > > longitudes,

> > > > nor do they tally with the so called sayana longitudes as per

> modern

> > > > astronomy.

> > > > What type of longitudes, as such, are there in the Surya Sidhanta

> and

> > > how

> > > > have

> > > > they been worked out?

> > > > 11. You have talked about Bhaskara-II vis-a-vis ayananamsha. The

> mean

> > > > longitudes of the Sidhanta Shiromani by Bhaskara-II as well do not

> at

> > > all

> > > > tally

> > > > with either Lahiri or Ramana or any other nirayana longitudes nor

> do

> > > they

> > > > tally

> > > > with the so called sayana longitudes as per modern astronomy! TO

> CROWN

> > > IT

> > > > ALL,

> > > > THEY DO NOT EVEN TALLY WITH THE SURYA SIDHANTA LONGITUDES neither

> at

> > > the

> > > > start

> > > > of kali Era nor at any other perioid! Why? Does it not mean that

> even

> > > > Bhaskara-II of around twelfth century had no faith in the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > calcuations?

> > > > 12 Same is the case with all the other sidhants including

> Aryabhati!

> > > No

> > > > sidhanta tallies with either modern astronomy---whether nirayana

> or

> > > > sayana---nor

> > > > do they tally with one another for any era, except for the start

> of

> > > the so

> > > > called Kali Era, where Aryabhati (ardharatrika), the Surya

> Sidhanta of

> > > > Pancha-sidhantika and mordern Surya Sidhanta sidhanta tally

> > > completely! The

> > > > longitudes at the start of Kali era also do not tally if we take

> the

> > > > audayika

> > > > system of Aryabhata---that had been prevailing in India for a

> > > considerable

> > > > period! In other words, even Aryabhata had no faith in the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > longitudes, either to start with or later since he shifted from

> > > > " ardharatrika "

> > > > to " audayika " . Why?

> > > > 13. With such a confusion in the sidhantas themselves, which

> sidhanta

> > > should

> > > > we

> > > > believe and why----especially since all of them are wrong as per

> > > modern

> > > > astronomy and also as compaed to one another?

> > > > 14. Is there any difference between the calculated longitudes of

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta and the authoritative/authentic statements in the same?

> E.g.

> > > > " Bhanor

> > > > makar sankranteh shanmaah, uttarayanam, karkyadestu tahtaiva syat

> > > shanmasah

> > > > dakshinayanam " . means that with the ingress of the sun into Makara

> > > Rashi,

> > > > the

> > > > six months of Uttarayana start and with the ingress of the sun

> into

> > > Karkata

> > > > Rashi, the six months of Dakshinayana start " . As per the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > calculations, this is an impossible situation. Surya Sidhanta

> Makar

> > > > Sankranti

> > > > does not at all coincide with the start of Uttarayana, nor does

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta karkata Sankranti coincide with the start of the six

> months

> > > of

> > > > Dakshinaya? How do you reconcile the two?

> > > > 15. There are quite a few statements in the Surya Sidhanta which

> talk

> > > of a

> > > > Tropical year i.e. a year related to the seasons and seasonal

> months,

> > > giving

> > > > an

> > > > impression that " Makar Sankranti is the shortest day of the year "

> and

> > > so on.

> > > >

> > > > Its calculations, however, yield some surprising results, which

> are

> > > correct

> > > > neither for a Tropical year nor for a sidereal year! They are just

> a

> > > sort of

> > > > imaginary year---and imaginary calculations---which is

> scientifically

> > > most

> > > > inaccurate! Why

> > > >

> > > > End excerpts.

> > > >

> > >

> ************************************************************************\

> \

> > > ****

> > > > *****************************************

> > > >

> > > > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@

> > > >

> > > > Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

> > > >

> > > > Shri Kaul Ji and whoever maybe concerned with this not-so-useful

> post,

> > > >

> > > > Please do not get annoyed with my answers (Read my previous

> rejoinder

> > > in

> > > > this thread). You do not know you are raising wrong questions :

> the

> > > > proof of astrological accuracy of SS is ONLY the astrological

> > > (phalita)

> > > > test of its results, and not the positions of physical planets.

> Since

> > > > you are not ready to test SS astrologically, you will never know

> its

> > > > worth. As for me, I will never try to prove the worth of SS to a

> > > person

> > > > who has consistently abused it besides abusing all Vedic

> Jyotishis. I

> > > > know a large number of Vedic Jyotishis need births in criminal

> wards

> > > of

> > > > some central jail. But so are many practitioners of other trades.

> It

> > > > does not mean we should throw the baby with the bathtub.

> > > >

> > > > First think what you are. A former astrologer ? An evangelist ? A

> new

> > > > Buddha eager to enlighten others about the fraud of Vedic

> Jyotishis ?

> > > > What is your qualification ? I am not raising these questions to

> > > malign

> > > > you, but to draw your attention towards the entrance point of

> Vedic

> > > > Jyotish which you have jumped over without qualifying properly.

> That

> > > > point is SIDDHAANTA, which is the bed-rock of that variety of

> Jyotisha

> > > > which may be labeled as :

> > > > Indian/Vedic/Bharatiya/Subcontinental/Whatever-you-call-it. I do

> not

> > > > care for the label, although I prefer " Vedic " owing to reasons I

> am

> > > not

> > > > willing to discuss here. Here, I am point towards the importance

> of

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Jyotisha. Why you do not think that I have

> > > > challenged you to solve some basic equations of SIDDHAANTA ,

> vowing

> > > > publicly that I will become your disciple in all respects if you

> > > > succedd? I know nobody in the world will help you in doing so. How

> do

> > > I

> > > > know it ??? Because I am a Vedic Jyotishi and I am PREDICTING

> > > > correctly that you will not succeed in solving the question raised

> by

> > > > me. So far, you have proven this prediction right by evading my

> > > > question.

> > > >

> > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > >

> > > > You may keep on building your castles in the air, but that will

> not

> > > > solve anything for you or for others. Astrologers do not take your

> > > views

> > > > seriously, and even if all anti-astrologers side with you, you

> will

> > > > never be able to impose a ban on Vedic Jyotisha in a democratic

> > > > society. Therefore, please give up warfare tactics and set down to

> > > > discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of discussion

> will

> > > be

> > > > decided by that person who qualifies in SIDDHAANTA skandha of

> Vedic

> > > > Jyotisha, because the questions you raise belong to this sphere.

> It is

> > > > the most difficult and secret skandha of Vedic Jyotisha ( " rahasyam

> > > > Brahma-samjnitam " ). It is time honoured rule of shaastraartha

> > > > (intellectual debate). Abusing " frauds " like me and " mlechchhas "

> like

> > > > my original Guru Maya the " reformed " Asura will not help you. I

> never

> > > > met Maya the " reformed " Asura as far as I know, yet it is part of

> > > > Rishi-Yajna to pay homage to originators of shaastras, and I pay

> > > homage

> > > > to Maya the " reformed " Asura by calling him my Guru in Jyotisha

> > > because

> > > > he gave the world many disciplines besides Jyotisha. He was not a

> > > Rishi,

> > > > but was indeed a teacher of great Rishis who learnt Jyotisha & c

> from

> > > > him. It is useless to discuss whether he was a superhuman being or

> > > not.

> > > > Such questions will not solve anything. Aristotle, the great Asura

> who

> > > > stole ideas of philistine sophists and got them killed, is reputed

> to

> > > > have said : the mark of genius is not the capability to solve

> great

> > > > questions, but to raise a genuine question, because humanity has

> guts

> > > to

> > > > solve any question now or later provided right questions are put

> forth

> > > > at right junctures. The proof of Aristotle being an unreformed

> clever

> > > > Asura lies in his name : Ari + stotra = The Praiser of Enemy (of

> > > > God/gods), ie The Praiser of Devil. So is the meaning of prefixes

> like

> > > > Ali, Ale, etc. I devoted decades on comparative linguistics, but

> later

> > > > found my findings will be opposed by all those members of Rascal

> > > > Societies and Ignoble Committees who create divisions in the world

> of

> > > > knowledge by distributing prizes which are worth less than a " bag

> of

> > > > potatoes " according to Jean Paul Sartre.

> > > >

> > > > Sir, no real sanyaasi has ever been defeated in shaastraartha by a

> > > > non-sanyaasi. A real sanyaasi is superior in shaastraartha not by

> dint

> > > > of superior bookish knowledge or other worldly traits, but by dint

> of

> > > > being the Chosen Lamb of God the Father Dyaus-Pitr (> Ju-piter).

> Each

> > > > real sanyaasi is a God-the-Son : Bhaagavata Purana says that God

> > > resides

> > > > secretly in every Jeeva, but is overtly manifest only to real

> > > sanyaasis.

> > > > Without practising brahmacharya like Ishu Shreshtha, you will not

> get

> > > > the blessing of Holy Mother. Brahmacharya is essential for all

> four

> > > > ashramas, including grihasthas (Lord Krishna said so in

> Mahabharata

> > > > during war between Arjuna and Ashvatthaama using brahmaastras).

> > > > Brahma-vidya or " rahasyam Brahma-samjnitam " like SS cannot be

> obtained

> > > > otherwise. You are in your later ashrama but do not want to give

> up

> > > > comforts of grihastha ashrama. If you do not want to leave the

> > > comforts

> > > > of grihastha ashram even after crossing half of full Age, you are

> NOT

> > > a

> > > > Vedic brahmin youself, and therefore do not deserve the right to

> throw

> > > > stones at others, esp at those who follow Vedic Dharma in actual

> life.

> > > > Hence, either shut up or accept a fair shaastraartha (I know you

> will

> > > do

> > > > neither) on SIDDHANTA-JYOTISHA , and show me how you can solve

> > > > mandaphala equations of SS as in Makaranda Table. I will put up no

> > > > further question and will become your follower in every respect.

> Each

> > > > word of a Vedic Brahmin must be a promise.

> > > >

> > > > -VJ

> > > >

October 30, 2009

Dear Kaul Saheb,

Were you pulling our collective leg recently when you were talking about your

ephemeris and your predictions based on that?

Or was that a technicality that we/I missed? Namely, that you are an astrologer

but just not into jyotish?

Please clarify to clear my misunderstanding. I have great admiration for all

astrologers and divinators who perform and give good predictions and advice to

others. Are you one that would rise in that broad category?

Thanks in advance for taking the time out of your busy schedule :-)

RR_

, " Krishen " <jyotirved wrote:

>

> Shri Vinay Jha ji,

>

> Jai Shri Ram!

>

> <It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, (that)

> Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for either

> learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha>

>

> I never claimed to be a Vedic astrologer, nor did I ask anybody to teach

> me the same! So how and why is your comment addressed " for me " ?

>

> I just asked you to explain as to how you had arrived at a particular

> ayanamsha for a particular date and whether it was plus or minus and so

> on. Does that mean a shastrartha?

>

> My dear friend, instead of hair-splitting and resorting to all the hue

> and cry unnecessarily, it would have been much better for everybody if

> you had answered the fifteen points raised by me.

>

> Pl. do it now.

>

> Jai Shri Ram

>

> A K Kaul

>

> , " VJha " <vinayjhaa16@> wrote:

> >

> > Shri Kaul Ji,

> >

> > My statement was :

> >

> > <<<

> > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for either

> > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > >>>

> >

> > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, because I

> > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One cannot learn

> > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you deliberately

> > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and distort

> > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not expressed

> in

> > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but you

> > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare tactics

> and

> > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

> > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in SIDDHAANTA

> > skandha " .

> >

> > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you deny it

> > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating in

> > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

> > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

> >

> > Your following statement is malafide :

> >

> > <<<

> > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and blowing

> your

> > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered the

> > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit of

> > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > sidhdanta jyotisha.

> > >>>

> >

> > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I never

> > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

> Whether

> > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are not a

> > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet you

> want

> > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be under any

> > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can answer

> > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you are not

> a

> > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your fitness

> > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

> > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean planets),

> which

> > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in this

> > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants to

> learn.

> > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable persons,

> > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

> > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to learn,

> > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

> >

> > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not going to

> > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness for a

> > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become a

> true

> > learner (which you will never do).

> >

> > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why you

> fail

> > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL TESTING

> > ??

> >

> > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom and a

> > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started abusing all

> > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing to

> abide

> > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your intellectual

> > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

> > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

> spreading

> > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who is

> > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

> required

> > in making true planet from mean one.

> >

> > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The ball is

> > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do not hope

> > any change in your offensive language.

> >

> > -VJ

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

> > , " jyotirved " jyotirved@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

> > >

> > > Jai Shri Ram!

>

October 30, 2009

Dear Rohini,

I was hoping that Vinay will give a tough fight to Kaul and will eventually

expose the hollowness of the latter. Vinay is really competent in Suryasiddhanta

and Makaranda tables etc. and he was the right person to handle those issues. I

prefer to argue only on the issues related to history, Hindu astronomy and other

dharmashastras but not much on the issues in astrology as big astrology scholars

are there in these Jyotish fora.

1)

Kaul had not produced a single Greek book which contains all the nityy-gritties

of Indian astrology yet he claims that the Indians have learnt astrology from

the Greeks.

2)

All the grahas such as Mangal and Shani were known in the times of Mahabharata

more than five thousand years ago but it appears that he had not read the

Mahabharata properly yet. He goes on asking others to show him the Mangal and

Shani grahas in Vedas. He wants the grahas in those very same names in the

Vedas yet he himself quotes the Suryasiddhanta, where Surya is mentioned by the

name Bhanu. Such duplicity only Kaul is capable of.

3)

Rashis are there in the puranas for all to see and he had not read any of those

yet. He says the Rashis are imported from Greece.

4)

Baudhayana named the seven days after the seven planets yet Kaul says that the

Indians imported the Varas from the Greeks. Even the Atharvana Jyotisha mentions

the Varas. Without adducing any proof he says that Atharvana Jyotisha is of 500

BCE. If India would have had now a righteous king like Lord Shri Ram he would

have given Kaul the punishment that He gave to some people who went against the

shastras.

5)

Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad Gita that He is month of Margashirsha among

the months yet Kaul does not want to have the name of the Margashirsha in the

Hindu calendar. I wonder why Lord Krishna's Sudarshan is in shelf

now.

6)

Kaul rejects the twelve divisions of the zodiac as they are imaginary and does

not recognise why the divisions were made and named. He forgets that in that

case he must also reject his own name as that too is imaginary. He should also

must not assume other imaginary names like Jyotirved. His parents imagined the

name of Avtar and I am sure they did not obviously know whether it will be an

avtar of godness or evil.

7)

He cides the astrologers for calling the astrology Vedic. All ancient Indian

knowledge is Vedic. The puranas are called the fifth Veda. Before Vedavyasa

rearranged the Vedic literature into the four Vedas and the puranas all were

together called Veda. He has not read any of the Shastras. He read some quoted

pieces here and there and probably read the Dixit's book and wants the challenge

the Hindu scholarship with that meagre information. When I said the Manu had

mentionesd Astrology he wants that we

should tell him the references. Manu had told that the king should have

astrologer. He also barred the Vanaprasthi from practising astrology. When the

Dharmashastra says about the Astrology he goes on telling that the Hindus learnt

astrology from the Greeks. If you think about it seriously I am sure your blood

will boil.

8)

He calls Varahamihira the greatest charlaan as he thinks that Varaha mihira

copied from Greek text. There was no greek text available to Varahamihira and he

could have realised the true date of Varahamihira had he known the difference

between Varahamihira's mention of Sakendra kala and the Sakanta kala mentione d

by Brahmagupta. He thinks that what Dixit said is the last word in ancient

Indian chronology. Had Dixit been alive today he would have revised his opinion

himself on the chronological matters but his unworthy disciple Kaul would not.

9)

Varahamihira said that the yavana with knowledge of astrology has a respectable

status what then would be that of Brahman with knowledge of astrology. Kaul

mistranslated the Sanskrit verse to his advantage to belittle Varahamihira. Or

is it that he does not know sanskrit because very recently he gave a verse in

connection with the date of Lord Rama.

Kaul's unsubstantiated claims are endless and he is shouting from the rooftop

all these years, which compels me to guess that probably he thinks the Hindus

to be idiots.

Best wishes,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Thu, 10/29/09, rohinicrystal <jyotish_vani wrote:

rohinicrystal <jyotish_vani

Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

Thursday, October 29, 2009, 6:09 PM

Dear Vinay-jee,

Looking forward to your return, when the time and timing is right! You will know

when that is, I am certain!

Best regards,

Rohiniranjan

, " VJha " <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

> To Moderator :

>

> I joined this group in the vain hope of having discussions about

> astrology. But I have consistently been forced to waste my time on

> haters and abusers of astrology. I recently declared many times that I

> have no time to discuss non-astrological or anti-astrological topics

> with non-astrologers. Hence, I am now leaving this group for good of

> everyone, because my posts on astrological topics such as forecasts on

> stock prices evoke no response. Thanks.

>

> -VJ

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

> , " jyotishi " <raj@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Friends,

> >

> > I humbly request you to stop abusing each other. This is serving no

> purpose. The topic is great, but the discussion is lousy.

> >

> > I am forced to moderate now.

> >

> > raj

> >

> > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Kaul Ji,

> > >

> > > My statement was :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, because

> I

> > > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One cannot

> learn

> > > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you deliberately

> > > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and

> distort

> > > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not

> expressed in

> > > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but you

> > > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare tactics

> and

> > > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

> > > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in

> SIDDHAANTA

> > > skandha " .

> > >

> > > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you deny

> it

> > > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating in

> > > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

> > > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

> > >

> > > Your following statement is malafide :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and blowing

> your

> > > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered the

> > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

> of

> > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > sidhdanta jyotisha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I

> never

> > > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

> Whether

> > > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are not a

> > > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet you

> want

> > > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be under

> any

> > > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can

> answer

> > > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you are

> not a

> > > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your

> fitness

> > > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

> > > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean planets),

> which

> > > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in this

> > > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants to

> learn.

> > > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable persons,

> > > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

> > > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to

> learn,

> > > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

> > >

> > > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not going

> to

> > > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness for

> a

> > > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become a

> true

> > > learner (which you will never do).

> > >

> > > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why you

> fail

> > > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL

> TESTING

> > > ??

> > >

> > > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom and a

> > > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started abusing

> all

> > > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing to

> abide

> > > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your intellectual

> > > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

> > > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

> spreading

> > > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who is

> > > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

> required

> > > in making true planet from mean one.

> > >

> > > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The ball

> is

> > > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do not

> hope

> > > any change in your offensive language.

> > >

> > > -VJ

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

> > > , " jyotirved " <jyotirved@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

> > > >

> > > > Jai Shri Ram!

> > > >

> > > > Surprisingly, you are making additions to your own posts through

> your

> > > own

> > > > rejoinders! The post you have " replied " also is from you,

> addressed

> > > to me,

> > > > but you are replying it yourself!

> > > >

> > > > The long and short of your post as well as rejoinder is that,

> " Unless

> > > and

> > > > untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in SIDDHAANTA

> > > skandha of

> > > > Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for either learning Vedic

> > > Jyotisha or

> > > > participating in any shaastraartha " which means that as on date

> anyone

> > > who

> > > > is not a " parangata " in sidhanta skanda of jyotisha is not fit for

> > > learning,

> > > > much less practicing " Vedic Jyotisha " , and " participating in any

> > > shastrarta "

> > > >

> > > > In other words, according to you, all those jyotishis, who have

> not

> > > studied

> > > > and qualified the test of sidhanta skanda, but are calling

> themselves

> > > " Vedic

> > > > jyotishis " even then, are making false claims! So your post is

> aimed

> > > more

> > > > at those jyotishis than at me, since I am not calling myself a

> " Vedic

> > > > jyotishi " at all much less practicing it!

> > > >

> > > > Anyway, instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and

> > > blowing

> > > > your own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had

> answered

> > > the

> > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

> of

> > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > sidhdanta

> > > > jyotisha.

> > > >

> > > > At least pl. do explain as to how you calculated the ayanamsha of

> > > > " 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD " when it was zero for February

> 17/18,

> > > 3102

> > > > BCE, and with an oscillatory movement like a pendulum of the

> " chakra "

> > > @ 54 "

> > > > per year up to 27 degrees plus and minus! Was that ayanamsha of

> > > 22:38:44

> > > > plus or minus, i.e. whether it was to be added to the Surya

> Sidhanta

> > > > longitudes to make them so called nirayana or sayana or whatever

> or

> > > was it

> > > > to be subtracted from them and why? What is the relevance of

> > > ayanamsha in

> > > > the Surya Sidhanta?

> > > >

> > > > How are we supposed to have calculated eclipses or rising and

> setting

> > > of

> > > > planets etc. from the Surya Sidhanta if that sidhanta is only for

> > > " phalita

> > > > jyotisha graha-spashta " and not meant for calculating the planets

> of

> > > modern

> > > > astronomy?

> > > >

> > > > Though I was not surprised at all at your " bravery " by deleting

> even

> > > > " BVB6.doc " from your forum, since that post actually caught you on

> the

> > > wrong

> > > > foot because we are really celebrating all our festivals and

> muhurtas

> > > on

> > > > wrong days, much against the canons of the Puranas like Bhagavata,

> > > Vishnu

> > > > Purana, Vishnudharmotara Purana and even the sidhantas like the

> Surya

> > > > Sidhata etc., as they are all talking of Makar Sankranti being

> the

> > > > shortest day of the year and a Karkata Sankranti the longest day

> of

> > > the

> > > > year and so on! In other words, they are all talking of a so

> called

> > > sayana

> > > > Rashichakra instead of the so called nirayana rashichakra, whether

> of

> > > Lahiri

> > > > or Ramana or even the Surya Sidhanta, which you want the world to

> > > believe is

> > > > as per the shastras and the sidhantas, nay even the Vedas!

> > > >

> > > > I am again posting that BVB6.doc on your forum hoping against hope

> > > that you

> > > > will ponder on the facts adumbrated therein.

> > > >

> > > > I am also repeating all those fifteen points below and if you do

> not

> > > answer

> > > > them even then, all I can do is recite the shlokas of the Gita

> > > 2/35-36 for

> > > > you, which are:

> > > >

> > > > bhayad ranad uparatam mansyante tvam maharathah,

> > > >

> > > > yeshm chai tvam bahumato bhootva yasyasi laghavam

> > > >

> > > > avachya vadanshchai vadishyanti tavahitah,

> > > >

> > > > nindantastava samarthyam tato dukha taram nu kim

> > > >

> > > > Being a scholar extraordinary, I know you will be able to

> understand

> > > the

> > > > meaning of these shlokas from the Gita.

> > > >

> > > > Jai Shri Ram

> > > >

> > > > A K Kaul

> > > >

> > >

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

======\

> \

> > > ====

> > > > ===

> > > >

> > > > Excerpts from # 196 in Vedic Astrologyforum

> > > >

> > > > Would you kindly throw some light on the following points:

> > > > 1. Kindly demonstrate in a step by step manner scientifically as

> to

> > > how it

> > > > was

> > > > 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD? Is it plus or minus as on that

> date

> > > i.e.

> > > > whether it is to be deducted from the syana longitudes of modern

> > > astronomy

> > > > to

> > > > find the so called nirayana Surya Sidhanta longitudes just as

> Lahiri

> > > > ayanamsha

> > > > is subtracted to find Lahiri longitudes or do we have to add it

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta longitudes to find the Sayana longitudes from them,

> presuming

> > > that

> > > > the

> > > > SS longitudes are so called nirayana?

> > > > 2. If it is neither to be deducted from the sayana longitudes nor

> is

> > > it to

> > > > be

> > > > added to the SS longitudes etc, what is its relevance and why is

> to be

> > > > calculated at all? In other words, why has the Surya Sidhanta

> given

> > > these

> > > > three

> > > > shlokas of " trimshat kritya yuga bhanam.... " if they do not serve

> any

> > > > purpose at

> > > > all?

> > > > 3. Does it i.e. the ayanamsha have any relevance to modern

> astronomy

> > > > vis-a-vis

> > > > the Surya Sidhanta? I mean are we to work just with the Surya

> Sidhanta

> > > > calculations for preparing horoscopes alone but for calculating

> > > eclipses,

> > > > rising

> > > > and setting of planets or even the sunrise/sunset etc.etc., do we

> have

> > > to go

> > > > on

> > > > chanting the mantra " NASA sharnam gachhami " ? Does Surya Sidhanta

> > > ayanamsha

> > > > have any relevance to those " drik calculations " ?

> > > > 4. Which Surya Sidhanta are you talking about i.e. whether it is

> the

> > > one

> > > > that

> > > > is available in the market or is it a different one?

> > > > 5. If it is not available in the market, how do we get it or do we

> > > have to

> > > > go by

> > > > conjecture work?

> > > > 6. Is the Surya Sidhanta of Panchasidhantika in any way relevant

> to

> > > the

> > > > present

> > > > Surya Sidhanta or not?

> > > > 7. Who was the author of the Surya Sidhanta according to you and

> to

> > > whom was

> > > > it

> > > > revealed and when?

> > > > 8. What is the date of " creation/revelatio n " of the Surya Sidhanta

> > > according

> > > > to

> > > > you and why?

> > > > 9. How far are the durations of yugas and yuga theories of the

> Surya

> > > > Sidhanta

> > > > correct and reliable according to you? Did the Kali Era really

> start

> > > in 3102

> > > > BCE according to you since that is what the SS says in an indirect

> > > manner.

> > > > 10. The mean longitudes of the Surya Sidhanta, whether of the

> > > > Panchasidhantika

> > > > Surya Sidhanta, or the currently available one, do not tally AT

> ALL

> > > with

> > > > either

> > > > the so called Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara or any other Ayanamsha

> > > > longitudes,

> > > > nor do they tally with the so called sayana longitudes as per

> modern

> > > > astronomy.

> > > > What type of longitudes, as such, are there in the Surya Sidhanta

> and

> > > how

> > > > have

> > > > they been worked out?

> > > > 11. You have talked about Bhaskara-II vis-a-vis ayananamsha. The

> mean

> > > > longitudes of the Sidhanta Shiromani by Bhaskara-II as well do not

> at

> > > all

> > > > tally

> > > > with either Lahiri or Ramana or any other nirayana longitudes nor

> do

> > > they

> > > > tally

> > > > with the so called sayana longitudes as per modern astronomy! TO

> CROWN

> > > IT

> > > > ALL,

> > > > THEY DO NOT EVEN TALLY WITH THE SURYA SIDHANTA LONGITUDES neither

> at

> > > the

> > > > start

> > > > of kali Era nor at any other perioid! Why? Does it not mean that

> even

> > > > Bhaskara-II of around twelfth century had no faith in the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > calcuations?

> > > > 12 Same is the case with all the other sidhants including

> Aryabhati!

> > > No

> > > > sidhanta tallies with either modern astronomy--- whether nirayana

> or

> > > > sayana---nor

> > > > do they tally with one another for any era, except for the start

> of

> > > the so

> > > > called Kali Era, where Aryabhati (ardharatrika) , the Surya

> Sidhanta of

> > > > Pancha-sidhantika and mordern Surya Sidhanta sidhanta tally

> > > completely! The

> > > > longitudes at the start of Kali era also do not tally if we take

> the

> > > > audayika

> > > > system of Aryabhata--- that had been prevailing in India for a

> > > considerable

> > > > period! In other words, even Aryabhata had no faith in the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > longitudes, either to start with or later since he shifted from

> > > > " ardharatrika "

> > > > to " audayika " . Why?

> > > > 13. With such a confusion in the sidhantas themselves, which

> sidhanta

> > > should

> > > > we

> > > > believe and why----especially since all of them are wrong as per

> > > modern

> > > > astronomy and also as compaed to one another?

> > > > 14. Is there any difference between the calculated longitudes of

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta and the authoritative/ authentic statements in the same?

> E.g.

> > > > " Bhanor

> > > > makar sankranteh shanmaah, uttarayanam, karkyadestu tahtaiva syat

> > > shanmasah

> > > > dakshinayanam " . means that with the ingress of the sun into Makara

> > > Rashi,

> > > > the

> > > > six months of Uttarayana start and with the ingress of the sun

> into

> > > Karkata

> > > > Rashi, the six months of Dakshinayana start " . As per the Surya

> > > Sidhanta

> > > > calculations, this is an impossible situation. Surya Sidhanta

> Makar

> > > > Sankranti

> > > > does not at all coincide with the start of Uttarayana, nor does

> the

> > > Surya

> > > > Sidhanta karkata Sankranti coincide with the start of the six

> months

> > > of

> > > > Dakshinaya? How do you reconcile the two?

> > > > 15. There are quite a few statements in the Surya Sidhanta which

> talk

> > > of a

> > > > Tropical year i.e. a year related to the seasons and seasonal

> months,

> > > giving

> > > > an

> > > > impression that " Makar Sankranti is the shortest day of the year "

> and

> > > so on.

> > > >

> > > > Its calculations, however, yield some surprising results, which

> are

> > > correct

> > > > neither for a Tropical year nor for a sidereal year! They are just

> a

> > > sort of

> > > > imaginary year---and imaginary calculations- --which is

> scientifically

> > > most

> > > > inaccurate! Why

> > > >

> > > > End excerpts.

> > > >

> > >

> ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* *********

******\

> \

> > > ****

> > > > ************ ********* ********* ********* **

> > > >

> > > > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@

> > > >

> > > > Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

> > > >

> > > > Shri Kaul Ji and whoever maybe concerned with this not-so-useful

> post,

> > > >

> > > > Please do not get annoyed with my answers (Read my previous

> rejoinder

> > > in

> > > > this thread). You do not know you are raising wrong questions :

> the

> > > > proof of astrological accuracy of SS is ONLY the astrological

> > > (phalita)

> > > > test of its results, and not the positions of physical planets.

> Since

> > > > you are not ready to test SS astrologically, you will never know

> its

> > > > worth. As for me, I will never try to prove the worth of SS to a

> > > person

> > > > who has consistently abused it besides abusing all Vedic

> Jyotishis. I

> > > > know a large number of Vedic Jyotishis need births in criminal

> wards

> > > of

> > > > some central jail. But so are many practitioners of other trades.

> It

> > > > does not mean we should throw the baby with the bathtub.

> > > >

> > > > First think what you are. A former astrologer ? An evangelist ? A

> new

> > > > Buddha eager to enlighten others about the fraud of Vedic

> Jyotishis ?

> > > > What is your qualification ? I am not raising these questions to

> > > malign

> > > > you, but to draw your attention towards the entrance point of

> Vedic

> > > > Jyotish which you have jumped over without qualifying properly.

> That

> > > > point is SIDDHAANTA, which is the bed-rock of that variety of

> Jyotisha

> > > > which may be labeled as :

> > > > Indian/Vedic/ Bharatiya/ Subcontinental/ Whatever- you-call- it. I do

> not

> > > > care for the label, although I prefer " Vedic " owing to reasons I

> am

> > > not

> > > > willing to discuss here. Here, I am point towards the importance

> of

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Jyotisha. Why you do not think that I have

> > > > challenged you to solve some basic equations of SIDDHAANTA ,

> vowing

> > > > publicly that I will become your disciple in all respects if you

> > > > succedd? I know nobody in the world will help you in doing so. How

> do

> > > I

> > > > know it ??? Because I am a Vedic Jyotishi and I am PREDICTING

> > > > correctly that you will not succeed in solving the question raised

> by

> > > > me. So far, you have proven this prediction right by evading my

> > > > question.

> > > >

> > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > >

> > > > You may keep on building your castles in the air, but that will

> not

> > > > solve anything for you or for others. Astrologers do not take your

> > > views

> > > > seriously, and even if all anti-astrologers side with you, you

> will

> > > > never be able to impose a ban on Vedic Jyotisha in a democratic

> > > > society. Therefore, please give up warfare tactics and set down to

> > > > discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of discussion

> will

> > > be

> > > > decided by that person who qualifies in SIDDHAANTA skandha of

> Vedic

> > > > Jyotisha, because the questions you raise belong to this sphere.

> It is

> > > > the most difficult and secret skandha of Vedic Jyotisha ( " rahasyam

> > > > Brahma-samjnitam " ). It is time honoured rule of shaastraartha

> > > > (intellectual debate). Abusing " frauds " like me and " mlechchhas "

> like

> > > > my original Guru Maya the " reformed " Asura will not help you. I

> never

> > > > met Maya the " reformed " Asura as far as I know, yet it is part of

> > > > Rishi-Yajna to pay homage to originators of shaastras, and I pay

> > > homage

> > > > to Maya the " reformed " Asura by calling him my Guru in Jyotisha

> > > because

> > > > he gave the world many disciplines besides Jyotisha. He was not a

> > > Rishi,

> > > > but was indeed a teacher of great Rishis who learnt Jyotisha & c

> from

> > > > him. It is useless to discuss whether he was a superhuman being or

> > > not.

> > > > Such questions will not solve anything. Aristotle, the great Asura

> who

> > > > stole ideas of philistine sophists and got them killed, is reputed

> to

> > > > have said : the mark of genius is not the capability to solve

> great

> > > > questions, but to raise a genuine question, because humanity has

> guts

> > > to

> > > > solve any question now or later provided right questions are put

> forth

> > > > at right junctures. The proof of Aristotle being an unreformed

> clever

> > > > Asura lies in his name : Ari + stotra = The Praiser of Enemy (of

> > > > God/gods), ie The Praiser of Devil. So is the meaning of prefixes

> like

> > > > Ali, Ale, etc. I devoted decades on comparative linguistics, but

> later

> > > > found my findings will be opposed by all those members of Rascal

> > > > Societies and Ignoble Committees who create divisions in the world

> of

> > > > knowledge by distributing prizes which are worth less than a " bag

> of

> > > > potatoes " according to Jean Paul Sartre.

> > > >

> > > > Sir, no real sanyaasi has ever been defeated in shaastraartha by a

> > > > non-sanyaasi. A real sanyaasi is superior in shaastraartha not by

> dint

> > > > of superior bookish knowledge or other worldly traits, but by dint

> of

> > > > being the Chosen Lamb of God the Father Dyaus-Pitr (> Ju-piter).

> Each

> > > > real sanyaasi is a God-the-Son : Bhaagavata Purana says that God

> > > resides

> > > > secretly in every Jeeva, but is overtly manifest only to real

> > > sanyaasis.

> > > > Without practising brahmacharya like Ishu Shreshtha, you will not

> get

> > > > the blessing of Holy Mother. Brahmacharya is essential for all

> four

> > > > ashramas, including grihasthas (Lord Krishna said so in

> Mahabharata

> > > > during war between Arjuna and Ashvatthaama using brahmaastras) .

> > > > Brahma-vidya or " rahasyam Brahma-samjnitam " like SS cannot be

> obtained

> > > > otherwise. You are in your later ashrama but do not want to give

> up

> > > > comforts of grihastha ashrama. If you do not want to leave the

> > > comforts

> > > > of grihastha ashram even after crossing half of full Age, you are

> NOT

> > > a

> > > > Vedic brahmin youself, and therefore do not deserve the right to

> throw

> > > > stones at others, esp at those who follow Vedic Dharma in actual

> life.

> > > > Hence, either shut up or accept a fair shaastraartha (I know you

> will

> > > do

> > > > neither) on SIDDHANTA-JYOTISHA , and show me how you can solve

> > > > mandaphala equations of SS as in Makaranda Table. I will put up no

> > > > further question and will become your follower in every respect.

> Each

> > > > word of a Vedic Brahmin must be a promise.

> > > >

> > > > -VJ

> > > >

October 30, 2009

Dear Dada,

Let choto-bhai share something publicly! Vinay_jee is blessed, I think! He does

get engaged, and plunges in with passion to a different degree each time, but

there is a proverbial " Angel on his shoulder " that he listens to!

Someday, as long as he remains true to himself, others will listen to him too!

And I am certain he will know when to do so! Believe it or not!!

Kind regards,

Rohiniranjan

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Dear Rohini,

>

> I was hoping that Vinay will give a tough fight to Kaul and will eventually

expose the hollowness of the latter. Vinay is really competent in Suryasiddhanta

and Makaranda tables etc. and he was the right person to handle those issues. I

prefer to argue only on the issues related to history, Hindu astronomy and other

dharmashastras but not much on the issues in astrology as big astrology scholars

are there in these Jyotish fora.

> 1)

> Kaul had not produced a single Greek book which contains all the

nityy-gritties of Indian astrology yet he claims that the Indians have learnt

astrology from the Greeks.

> 2)

> All the grahas such as Mangal and Shani were known in the times of

Mahabharata more than five thousand years ago but it appears that he had not

read the Mahabharata properly yet. He goes on asking others to show him the

Mangal and

> Shani grahas in Vedas. He wants the grahas in those very same names in the

Vedas yet he himself quotes the Suryasiddhanta, where Surya is mentioned by the

name Bhanu. Such duplicity only Kaul is capable of.

> 3)

> Rashis are there in the puranas for all to see and he had not read any of

those yet. He says the Rashis are imported from Greece.

> 4)

> Baudhayana named the seven days after the seven planets yet Kaul says that the

Indians imported the Varas from the Greeks. Even the Atharvana Jyotisha mentions

the Varas. Without adducing any proof he says that Atharvana Jyotisha is of 500

BCE. If India would have had now a righteous king like Lord Shri Ram he would

have given Kaul the punishment that He gave to some people who went against the

shastras.

> 5)

> Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad Gita that He is month of Margashirsha among

the months yet Kaul does not want to have the name of the Margashirsha in the

Hindu calendar. I wonder why Lord Krishna's Sudarshan is in shelf

> now.

> 6)

> Kaul rejects the twelve divisions of the zodiac as they are imaginary and does

not recognise why the divisions were made and named. He forgets that in that

case he must also reject his own name as that too is imaginary. He should also

must not assume other imaginary names like Jyotirved. His parents imagined the

name of Avtar and I am sure they did not obviously know whether it will be an

avtar of godness or evil.

> 7)

> He cides the astrologers for calling the astrology Vedic. All ancient Indian

knowledge is Vedic. The puranas are called the fifth Veda. Before Vedavyasa

rearranged the Vedic literature into the four Vedas and the puranas all were

together called Veda. He has not read any of the Shastras. He read some quoted

pieces here and there and probably read the Dixit's book and wants the challenge

the Hindu scholarship with that meagre information. When I said the Manu had

mentionesd Astrology he wants that we

> should tell him the references. Manu had told that the king should have

astrologer. He also barred the Vanaprasthi from practising astrology. When the

Dharmashastra says about the Astrology he goes on telling that the Hindus learnt

astrology from the Greeks. If you think about it seriously I am sure your blood

will boil.

> 8)

> He calls Varahamihira the greatest charlaan as he thinks that Varaha mihira

copied from Greek text. There was no greek text available to Varahamihira and he

could have realised the true date of Varahamihira had he known the difference

between Varahamihira's mention of Sakendra kala and the Sakanta kala mentione d

by Brahmagupta. He thinks that what Dixit said is the last word in ancient

Indian chronology. Had Dixit been alive today he would have revised his opinion

himself on the chronological matters but his unworthy disciple Kaul would not.

> 9)

> Varahamihira said that the yavana with knowledge of astrology has a

respectable status what then would be that of Brahman with knowledge of

astrology. Kaul mistranslated the Sanskrit verse to his advantage to belittle

Varahamihira. Or is it that he does not know sanskrit because very recently he

gave a verse in connection with the date of Lord Rama.

>

> Kaul's unsubstantiated claims are endless and he is shouting from the rooftop

> all these years, which compels me to guess that probably he thinks the

Hindus to be idiots.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

> --- On Thu, 10/29/09, rohinicrystal <jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> rohinicrystal <jyotish_vani

> Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

>

> Thursday, October 29, 2009, 6:09 PM

>

> Dear Vinay-jee,

>

> Looking forward to your return, when the time and timing is right! You will

know when that is, I am certain!

>

> Best regards,

>

> Rohiniranjan

>

> , " VJha " <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote:

>

> >

>

> > To Moderator :

>

> >

>

> > I joined this group in the vain hope of having discussions about

>

> > astrology. But I have consistently been forced to waste my time on

>

> > haters and abusers of astrology. I recently declared many times that I

>

> > have no time to discuss non-astrological or anti-astrological topics

>

> > with non-astrologers. Hence, I am now leaving this group for good of

>

> > everyone, because my posts on astrological topics such as forecasts on

>

> > stock prices evoke no response. Thanks.

>

> >

>

> > -VJ

>

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

>

> > , " jyotishi " <raj@> wrote:

>

> > >

>

> > > Dear Friends,

>

> > >

>

> > > I humbly request you to stop abusing each other. This is serving no

>

> > purpose. The topic is great, but the discussion is lousy.

>

> > >

>

> > > I am forced to moderate now.

>

> > >

>

> > > raj

>

> > >

>

> > >

>

> > > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@ wrote:

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Shri Kaul Ji,

>

> > > >

>

> > > > My statement was :

>

> > > >

>

> > > > <<<

>

> > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

>

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

>

> > either

>

> > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

>

> > > > >>>

>

> > > >

>

> > > > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, because

>

> > I

>

> > > > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One cannot

>

> > learn

>

> > > > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you deliberately

>

> > > > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and

>

> > distort

>

> > > > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not

>

> > expressed in

>

> > > > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but you

>

> > > > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare tactics

>

> > and

>

> > > > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

>

> > > > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in

>

> > SIDDHAANTA

>

> > > > skandha " .

>

> > > >

>

> > > > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you deny

>

> > it

>

> > > > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating in

>

> > > > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

>

> > > > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Your following statement is malafide :

>

> > > >

>

> > > > <<<

>

> > > > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and blowing

>

> > your

>

> > > > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered the

>

> > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

>

> > of

>

> > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

>

> > > > sidhdanta jyotisha.

>

> > > > >>>

>

> > > >

>

> > > > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I

>

> > never

>

> > > > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

>

> > Whether

>

> > > > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are not a

>

> > > > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet you

>

> > want

>

> > > > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be under

>

> > any

>

> > > > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can

>

> > answer

>

> > > > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you are

>

> > not a

>

> > > > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your

>

> > fitness

>

> > > > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

>

> > > > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean planets),

>

> > which

>

> > > > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in this

>

> > > > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants to

>

> > learn.

>

> > > > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable persons,

>

> > > > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

>

> > > > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to

>

> > learn,

>

> > > > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not going

>

> > to

>

> > > > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness for

>

> > a

>

> > > > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become a

>

> > true

>

> > > > learner (which you will never do).

>

> > > >

>

> > > > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why you

>

> > fail

>

> > > > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL

>

> > TESTING

>

> > > > ??

>

> > > >

>

> > > > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom and a

>

> > > > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started abusing

>

> > all

>

> > > > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing to

>

> > abide

>

> > > > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your intellectual

>

> > > > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

>

> > > > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

>

> > spreading

>

> > > > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who is

>

> > > > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

>

> > required

>

> > > > in making true planet from mean one.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The ball

>

> > is

>

> > > > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do not

>

> > hope

>

> > > > any change in your offensive language.

>

> > > >

>

> > > > -VJ

>

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

>

> > > > , " jyotirved " <jyotirved@> wrote:

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Jai Shri Ram!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Surprisingly, you are making additions to your own posts through

>

> > your

>

> > > > own

>

> > > > > rejoinders! The post you have " replied " also is from you,

>

> > addressed

>

> > > > to me,

>

> > > > > but you are replying it yourself!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > The long and short of your post as well as rejoinder is that,

>

> > " Unless

>

> > > > and

>

> > > > > untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in SIDDHAANTA

>

> > > > skandha of

>

> > > > > Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for either learning Vedic

>

> > > > Jyotisha or

>

> > > > > participating in any shaastraartha " which means that as on date

>

> > anyone

>

> > > > who

>

> > > > > is not a " parangata " in sidhanta skanda of jyotisha is not fit for

>

> > > > learning,

>

> > > > > much less practicing " Vedic Jyotisha " , and " participating in any

>

> > > > shastrarta "

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > In other words, according to you, all those jyotishis, who have

>

> > not

>

> > > > studied

>

> > > > > and qualified the test of sidhanta skanda, but are calling

>

> > themselves

>

> > > > " Vedic

>

> > > > > jyotishis " even then, are making false claims! So your post is

>

> > aimed

>

> > > > more

>

> > > > > at those jyotishis than at me, since I am not calling myself a

>

> > " Vedic

>

> > > > > jyotishi " at all much less practicing it!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Anyway, instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and

>

> > > > blowing

>

> > > > > your own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had

>

> > answered

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

>

> > of

>

> > > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

>

> > > > sidhdanta

>

> > > > > jyotisha.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > At least pl. do explain as to how you calculated the ayanamsha of

>

> > > > > " 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD " when it was zero for February

>

> > 17/18,

>

> > > > 3102

>

> > > > > BCE, and with an oscillatory movement like a pendulum of the

>

> > " chakra "

>

> > > > @ 54 "

>

> > > > > per year up to 27 degrees plus and minus! Was that ayanamsha of

>

> > > > 22:38:44

>

> > > > > plus or minus, i.e. whether it was to be added to the Surya

>

> > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > longitudes to make them so called nirayana or sayana or whatever

>

> > or

>

> > > > was it

>

> > > > > to be subtracted from them and why? What is the relevance of

>

> > > > ayanamsha in

>

> > > > > the Surya Sidhanta?

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > How are we supposed to have calculated eclipses or rising and

>

> > setting

>

> > > > of

>

> > > > > planets etc. from the Surya Sidhanta if that sidhanta is only for

>

> > > > " phalita

>

> > > > > jyotisha graha-spashta " and not meant for calculating the planets

>

> > of

>

> > > > modern

>

> > > > > astronomy?

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Though I was not surprised at all at your " bravery " by deleting

>

> > even

>

> > > > > " BVB6.doc " from your forum, since that post actually caught you on

>

> > the

>

> > > > wrong

>

> > > > > foot because we are really celebrating all our festivals and

>

> > muhurtas

>

> > > > on

>

> > > > > wrong days, much against the canons of the Puranas like Bhagavata,

>

> > > > Vishnu

>

> > > > > Purana, Vishnudharmotara Purana and even the sidhantas like the

>

> > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhata etc., as they are all talking of Makar Sankranti being

>

> > the

>

> > > > > shortest day of the year and a Karkata Sankranti the longest day

>

> > of

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > year and so on! In other words, they are all talking of a so

>

> > called

>

> > > > sayana

>

> > > > > Rashichakra instead of the so called nirayana rashichakra, whether

>

> > of

>

> > > > Lahiri

>

> > > > > or Ramana or even the Surya Sidhanta, which you want the world to

>

> > > > believe is

>

> > > > > as per the shastras and the sidhantas, nay even the Vedas!

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > I am again posting that BVB6.doc on your forum hoping against hope

>

> > > > that you

>

> > > > > will ponder on the facts adumbrated therein.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > I am also repeating all those fifteen points below and if you do

>

> > not

>

> > > > answer

>

> > > > > them even then, all I can do is recite the shlokas of the Gita

>

> > > > 2/35-36 for

>

> > > > > you, which are:

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > bhayad ranad uparatam mansyante tvam maharathah,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > yeshm chai tvam bahumato bhootva yasyasi laghavam

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > avachya vadanshchai vadishyanti tavahitah,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > nindantastava samarthyam tato dukha taram nu kim

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Being a scholar extraordinary, I know you will be able to

>

> > understand

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > meaning of these shlokas from the Gita.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Jai Shri Ram

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > A K Kaul

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > >

>

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

======\

>

> > \

>

> > > > ====

>

> > > > > ===

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Excerpts from # 196 in Vedic Astrologyforum

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Would you kindly throw some light on the following points:

>

> > > > > 1. Kindly demonstrate in a step by step manner scientifically as

>

> > to

>

> > > > how it

>

> > > > > was

>

> > > > > 22:38':44. " % for end of 2008 AD? Is it plus or minus as on that

>

> > date

>

> > > > i.e.

>

> > > > > whether it is to be deducted from the syana longitudes of modern

>

> > > > astronomy

>

> > > > > to

>

> > > > > find the so called nirayana Surya Sidhanta longitudes just as

>

> > Lahiri

>

> > > > > ayanamsha

>

> > > > > is subtracted to find Lahiri longitudes or do we have to add it

>

> > the

>

> > > > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta longitudes to find the Sayana longitudes from them,

>

> > presuming

>

> > > > that

>

> > > > > the

>

> > > > > SS longitudes are so called nirayana?

>

> > > > > 2. If it is neither to be deducted from the sayana longitudes nor

>

> > is

>

> > > > it to

>

> > > > > be

>

> > > > > added to the SS longitudes etc, what is its relevance and why is

>

> > to be

>

> > > > > calculated at all? In other words, why has the Surya Sidhanta

>

> > given

>

> > > > these

>

> > > > > three

>

> > > > > shlokas of " trimshat kritya yuga bhanam.... " if they do not serve

>

> > any

>

> > > > > purpose at

>

> > > > > all?

>

> > > > > 3. Does it i.e. the ayanamsha have any relevance to modern

>

> > astronomy

>

> > > > > vis-a-vis

>

> > > > > the Surya Sidhanta? I mean are we to work just with the Surya

>

> > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > calculations for preparing horoscopes alone but for calculating

>

> > > > eclipses,

>

> > > > > rising

>

> > > > > and setting of planets or even the sunrise/sunset etc.etc., do we

>

> > have

>

> > > > to go

>

> > > > > on

>

> > > > > chanting the mantra " NASA sharnam gachhami " ? Does Surya Sidhanta

>

> > > > ayanamsha

>

> > > > > have any relevance to those " drik calculations " ?

>

> > > > > 4. Which Surya Sidhanta are you talking about i.e. whether it is

>

> > the

>

> > > > one

>

> > > > > that

>

> > > > > is available in the market or is it a different one?

>

> > > > > 5. If it is not available in the market, how do we get it or do we

>

> > > > have to

>

> > > > > go by

>

> > > > > conjecture work?

>

> > > > > 6. Is the Surya Sidhanta of Panchasidhantika in any way relevant

>

> > to

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > present

>

> > > > > Surya Sidhanta or not?

>

> > > > > 7. Who was the author of the Surya Sidhanta according to you and

>

> > to

>

> > > > whom was

>

> > > > > it

>

> > > > > revealed and when?

>

> > > > > 8. What is the date of " creation/revelatio n " of the Surya Sidhanta

>

> > > > according

>

> > > > > to

>

> > > > > you and why?

>

> > > > > 9. How far are the durations of yugas and yuga theories of the

>

> > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > correct and reliable according to you? Did the Kali Era really

>

> > start

>

> > > > in 3102

>

> > > > > BCE according to you since that is what the SS says in an indirect

>

> > > > manner.

>

> > > > > 10. The mean longitudes of the Surya Sidhanta, whether of the

>

> > > > > Panchasidhantika

>

> > > > > Surya Sidhanta, or the currently available one, do not tally AT

>

> > ALL

>

> > > > with

>

> > > > > either

>

> > > > > the so called Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara or any other Ayanamsha

>

> > > > > longitudes,

>

> > > > > nor do they tally with the so called sayana longitudes as per

>

> > modern

>

> > > > > astronomy.

>

> > > > > What type of longitudes, as such, are there in the Surya Sidhanta

>

> > and

>

> > > > how

>

> > > > > have

>

> > > > > they been worked out?

>

> > > > > 11. You have talked about Bhaskara-II vis-a-vis ayananamsha. The

>

> > mean

>

> > > > > longitudes of the Sidhanta Shiromani by Bhaskara-II as well do not

>

> > at

>

> > > > all

>

> > > > > tally

>

> > > > > with either Lahiri or Ramana or any other nirayana longitudes nor

>

> > do

>

> > > > they

>

> > > > > tally

>

> > > > > with the so called sayana longitudes as per modern astronomy! TO

>

> > CROWN

>

> > > > IT

>

> > > > > ALL,

>

> > > > > THEY DO NOT EVEN TALLY WITH THE SURYA SIDHANTA LONGITUDES neither

>

> > at

>

> > > > the

>

> > > > > start

>

> > > > > of kali Era nor at any other perioid! Why? Does it not mean that

>

> > even

>

> > > > > Bhaskara-II of around twelfth century had no faith in the Surya

>

> > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > calcuations?

>

> > > > > 12 Same is the case with all the other sidhants including

>

> > Aryabhati!

>

> > > > No

>

> > > > > sidhanta tallies with either modern astronomy--- whether nirayana

>

> > or

>

> > > > > sayana---nor

>

> > > > > do they tally with one another for any era, except for the start

>

> > of

>

> > > > the so

>

> > > > > called Kali Era, where Aryabhati (ardharatrika) , the Surya

>

> > Sidhanta of

>

> > > > > Pancha-sidhantika and mordern Surya Sidhanta sidhanta tally

>

> > > > completely! The

>

> > > > > longitudes at the start of Kali era also do not tally if we take

>

> > the

>

> > > > > audayika

>

> > > > > system of Aryabhata--- that had been prevailing in India for a

>

> > > > considerable

>

> > > > > period! In other words, even Aryabhata had no faith in the Surya

>

> > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > longitudes, either to start with or later since he shifted from

>

> > > > > " ardharatrika "

>

> > > > > to " audayika " . Why?

>

> > > > > 13. With such a confusion in the sidhantas themselves, which

>

> > sidhanta

>

> > > > should

>

> > > > > we

>

> > > > > believe and why----especially since all of them are wrong as per

>

> > > > modern

>

> > > > > astronomy and also as compaed to one another?

>

> > > > > 14. Is there any difference between the calculated longitudes of

>

> > the

>

> > > > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta and the authoritative/ authentic statements in the same?

>

> > E.g.

>

> > > > > " Bhanor

>

> > > > > makar sankranteh shanmaah, uttarayanam, karkyadestu tahtaiva syat

>

> > > > shanmasah

>

> > > > > dakshinayanam " . means that with the ingress of the sun into Makara

>

> > > > Rashi,

>

> > > > > the

>

> > > > > six months of Uttarayana start and with the ingress of the sun

>

> > into

>

> > > > Karkata

>

> > > > > Rashi, the six months of Dakshinayana start " . As per the Surya

>

> > > > Sidhanta

>

> > > > > calculations, this is an impossible situation. Surya Sidhanta

>

> > Makar

>

> > > > > Sankranti

>

> > > > > does not at all coincide with the start of Uttarayana, nor does

>

> > the

>

> > > > Surya

>

> > > > > Sidhanta karkata Sankranti coincide with the start of the six

>

> > months

>

> > > > of

>

> > > > > Dakshinaya? How do you reconcile the two?

>

> > > > > 15. There are quite a few statements in the Surya Sidhanta which

>

> > talk

>

> > > > of a

>

> > > > > Tropical year i.e. a year related to the seasons and seasonal

>

> > months,

>

> > > > giving

>

> > > > > an

>

> > > > > impression that " Makar Sankranti is the shortest day of the year "

>

> > and

>

> > > > so on.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Its calculations, however, yield some surprising results, which

>

> > are

>

> > > > correct

>

> > > > > neither for a Tropical year nor for a sidereal year! They are just

>

> > a

>

> > > > sort of

>

> > > > > imaginary year---and imaginary calculations- --which is

>

> > scientifically

>

> > > > most

>

> > > > > inaccurate! Why

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > End excerpts.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > >

>

> > ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* *********

******\

>

> > \

>

> > > > ****

>

> > > > > ************ ********* ********* ********* **

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > , " VJha " vinayjhaa16@

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Fwd: Re: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Shri Kaul Ji and whoever maybe concerned with this not-so-useful

>

> > post,

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Please do not get annoyed with my answers (Read my previous

>

> > rejoinder

>

> > > > in

>

> > > > > this thread). You do not know you are raising wrong questions :

>

> > the

>

> > > > > proof of astrological accuracy of SS is ONLY the astrological

>

> > > > (phalita)

>

> > > > > test of its results, and not the positions of physical planets.

>

> > Since

>

> > > > > you are not ready to test SS astrologically, you will never know

>

> > its

>

> > > > > worth. As for me, I will never try to prove the worth of SS to a

>

> > > > person

>

> > > > > who has consistently abused it besides abusing all Vedic

>

> > Jyotishis. I

>

> > > > > know a large number of Vedic Jyotishis need births in criminal

>

> > wards

>

> > > > of

>

> > > > > some central jail. But so are many practitioners of other trades.

>

> > It

>

> > > > > does not mean we should throw the baby with the bathtub.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > First think what you are. A former astrologer ? An evangelist ? A

>

> > new

>

> > > > > Buddha eager to enlighten others about the fraud of Vedic

>

> > Jyotishis ?

>

> > > > > What is your qualification ? I am not raising these questions to

>

> > > > malign

>

> > > > > you, but to draw your attention towards the entrance point of

>

> > Vedic

>

> > > > > Jyotish which you have jumped over without qualifying properly.

>

> > That

>

> > > > > point is SIDDHAANTA, which is the bed-rock of that variety of

>

> > Jyotisha

>

> > > > > which may be labeled as :

>

> > > > > Indian/Vedic/ Bharatiya/ Subcontinental/ Whatever- you-call- it. I do

>

> > not

>

> > > > > care for the label, although I prefer " Vedic " owing to reasons I

>

> > am

>

> > > > not

>

> > > > > willing to discuss here. Here, I am point towards the importance

>

> > of

>

> > > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Jyotisha. Why you do not think that I have

>

> > > > > challenged you to solve some basic equations of SIDDHAANTA ,

>

> > vowing

>

> > > > > publicly that I will become your disciple in all respects if you

>

> > > > > succedd? I know nobody in the world will help you in doing so. How

>

> > do

>

> > > > I

>

> > > > > know it ??? Because I am a Vedic Jyotishi and I am PREDICTING

>

> > > > > correctly that you will not succeed in solving the question raised

>

> > by

>

> > > > > me. So far, you have proven this prediction right by evading my

>

> > > > > question.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

>

> > > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

>

> > either

>

> > > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > You may keep on building your castles in the air, but that will

>

> > not

>

> > > > > solve anything for you or for others. Astrologers do not take your

>

> > > > views

>

> > > > > seriously, and even if all anti-astrologers side with you, you

>

> > will

>

> > > > > never be able to impose a ban on Vedic Jyotisha in a democratic

>

> > > > > society. Therefore, please give up warfare tactics and set down to

>

> > > > > discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of discussion

>

> > will

>

> > > > be

>

> > > > > decided by that person who qualifies in SIDDHAANTA skandha of

>

> > Vedic

>

> > > > > Jyotisha, because the questions you raise belong to this sphere.

>

> > It is

>

> > > > > the most difficult and secret skandha of Vedic Jyotisha ( " rahasyam

>

> > > > > Brahma-samjnitam " ). It is time honoured rule of shaastraartha

>

> > > > > (intellectual debate). Abusing " frauds " like me and " mlechchhas "

>

> > like

>

> > > > > my original Guru Maya the " reformed " Asura will not help you. I

>

> > never

>

> > > > > met Maya the " reformed " Asura as far as I know, yet it is part of

>

> > > > > Rishi-Yajna to pay homage to originators of shaastras, and I pay

>

> > > > homage

>

> > > > > to Maya the " reformed " Asura by calling him my Guru in Jyotisha

>

> > > > because

>

> > > > > he gave the world many disciplines besides Jyotisha. He was not a

>

> > > > Rishi,

>

> > > > > but was indeed a teacher of great Rishis who learnt Jyotisha & c

>

> > from

>

> > > > > him. It is useless to discuss whether he was a superhuman being or

>

> > > > not.

>

> > > > > Such questions will not solve anything. Aristotle, the great Asura

>

> > who

>

> > > > > stole ideas of philistine sophists and got them killed, is reputed

>

> > to

>

> > > > > have said : the mark of genius is not the capability to solve

>

> > great

>

> > > > > questions, but to raise a genuine question, because humanity has

>

> > guts

>

> > > > to

>

> > > > > solve any question now or later provided right questions are put

>

> > forth

>

> > > > > at right junctures. The proof of Aristotle being an unreformed

>

> > clever

>

> > > > > Asura lies in his name : Ari + stotra = The Praiser of Enemy (of

>

> > > > > God/gods), ie The Praiser of Devil. So is the meaning of prefixes

>

> > like

>

> > > > > Ali, Ale, etc. I devoted decades on comparative linguistics, but

>

> > later

>

> > > > > found my findings will be opposed by all those members of Rascal

>

> > > > > Societies and Ignoble Committees who create divisions in the world

>

> > of

>

> > > > > knowledge by distributing prizes which are worth less than a " bag

>

> > of

>

> > > > > potatoes " according to Jean Paul Sartre.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > Sir, no real sanyaasi has ever been defeated in shaastraartha by a

>

> > > > > non-sanyaasi. A real sanyaasi is superior in shaastraartha not by

>

> > dint

>

> > > > > of superior bookish knowledge or other worldly traits, but by dint

>

> > of

>

> > > > > being the Chosen Lamb of God the Father Dyaus-Pitr (> Ju-piter).

>

> > Each

>

> > > > > real sanyaasi is a God-the-Son : Bhaagavata Purana says that God

>

> > > > resides

>

> > > > > secretly in every Jeeva, but is overtly manifest only to real

>

> > > > sanyaasis.

>

> > > > > Without practising brahmacharya like Ishu Shreshtha, you will not

>

> > get

>

> > > > > the blessing of Holy Mother. Brahmacharya is essential for all

>

> > four

>

> > > > > ashramas, including grihasthas (Lord Krishna said so in

>

> > Mahabharata

>

> > > > > during war between Arjuna and Ashvatthaama using brahmaastras) .

>

> > > > > Brahma-vidya or " rahasyam Brahma-samjnitam " like SS cannot be

>

> > obtained

>

> > > > > otherwise. You are in your later ashrama but do not want to give

>

> > up

>

> > > > > comforts of grihastha ashrama. If you do not want to leave the

>

> > > > comforts

>

> > > > > of grihastha ashram even after crossing half of full Age, you are

>

> > NOT

>

> > > > a

>

> > > > > Vedic brahmin youself, and therefore do not deserve the right to

>

> > throw

>

> > > > > stones at others, esp at those who follow Vedic Dharma in actual

>

> > life.

>

> > > > > Hence, either shut up or accept a fair shaastraartha (I know you

>

> > will

>

> > > > do

>

> > > > > neither) on SIDDHANTA-JYOTISHA , and show me how you can solve

>

> > > > > mandaphala equations of SS as in Makaranda Table. I will put up no

>

> > > > > further question and will become your follower in every respect.

>

> > Each

>

> > > > > word of a Vedic Brahmin must be a promise.

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > > -VJ

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

>

> > > > >

October 30, 2009

Shri Rohini Ranjan ji,

Jai Shri Ram!

< Were you pulling our collective leg recently when you were talking

about your ephemeris and your predictions based on that?>

Would you kindly quote the message number and date where I said that I

had made correct predictions, since once we peruse that message in full,

that will give the exact context as well as the answer that you are

looking for.

Pl note that it does not mean that I am denyin having made correct

predictions, but all it means is that everybody goes through a stage of

evolution, whether it is in predictive gimmicks or spiritual vein or

even in a materialistic sense.

Jai Shri Ram

A K Kaul

, " rohinicrystal " <jyotish_vani

wrote:

>

> Dear Kaul Saheb,

>

> Were you pulling our collective leg recently when you were talking

about your ephemeris and your predictions based on that?

>

> Or was that a technicality that we/I missed? Namely, that you are an

astrologer but just not into jyotish?

>

> Please clarify to clear my misunderstanding. I have great admiration

for all astrologers and divinators who perform and give good predictions

and advice to others. Are you one that would rise in that broad

category?

>

> Thanks in advance for taking the time out of your busy schedule :-)

>

> RR_

>

> , " Krishen " jyotirved@ wrote:

> >

> > Shri Vinay Jha ji,

> >

> > Jai Shri Ram!

> >

> > <It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, (that)

> > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

either

> > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha>

> >

> > I never claimed to be a Vedic astrologer, nor did I ask anybody to

teach

> > me the same! So how and why is your comment addressed " for me " ?

> >

> > I just asked you to explain as to how you had arrived at a

particular

> > ayanamsha for a particular date and whether it was plus or minus and

so

> > on. Does that mean a shastrartha?

> >

> > My dear friend, instead of hair-splitting and resorting to all the

hue

> > and cry unnecessarily, it would have been much better for everybody

if

> > you had answered the fifteen points raised by me.

> >

> > Pl. do it now.

> >

> > Jai Shri Ram

> >

> > A K Kaul

> >

> > , " VJha " <vinayjhaa16@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Kaul Ji,

> > >

> > > My statement was :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

either

> > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone,

because I

> > > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One cannot

learn

> > > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you deliberately

> > > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and

distort

> > > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not

expressed

> > in

> > > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but you

> > > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare

tactics

> > and

> > > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

> > > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in

SIDDHAANTA

> > > skandha " .

> > >

> > > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you deny

it

> > > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating

in

> > > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

> > > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

> > >

> > > Your following statement is malafide :

> > >

> > > <<<

> > > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and blowing

> > your

> > > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered

the

> > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

of

> > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > sidhdanta jyotisha.

> > > >>>

> > >

> > > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I

never

> > > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

> > Whether

> > > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are not

a

> > > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet you

> > want

> > > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be under

any

> > > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can

answer

> > > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you are

not

> > a

> > > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your

fitness

> > > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

> > > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean planets),

> > which

> > > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in

this

> > > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants to

> > learn.

> > > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable

persons,

> > > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

> > > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to

learn,

> > > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

> > >

> > > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not going

to

> > > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness

for a

> > > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become a

> > true

> > > learner (which you will never do).

> > >

> > > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why

you

> > fail

> > > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL

TESTING

> > > ??

> > >

> > > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom and

a

> > > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started abusing

all

> > > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing to

> > abide

> > > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your

intellectual

> > > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

> > > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

> > spreading

> > > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who

is

> > > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

> > required

> > > in making true planet from mean one.

> > >

> > > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The

ball is

> > > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do not

hope

> > > any change in your offensive language.

> > >

> > > -VJ

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

> > > , " jyotirved " jyotirved@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

> > > >

> > > > Jai Shri Ram!

> >

>

October 31, 2009

Haha Kaul ji!

You saved me the trouble to search through a lot of messages! Why, the very

message I am responding to: You claimed that you are not " denyin " ;-) that you

did make correct predictions! [Please read your own posting again!]

And Sunil Dada responded to that claim and acknowledged here that he saw you

admit on this forum that you did make correct predictions!

Now, since you claimed so, a couple of times, please give us the facts behind

your strong claims that you predicted correctly, in the past!

If you can and ONLY if you have the time! This is a humble request and not a

demand, by the way! You may be more interested in Astro-archeology, for all I

know!

I too find dinosaurs very interesting, but in movies etc -- and not riding on

the bus with me, daily!

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

, " Krishen " <jyotirved wrote:

>

> Shri Rohini Ranjan ji,

>

> Jai Shri Ram!

>

> < Were you pulling our collective leg recently when you were talking

> about your ephemeris and your predictions based on that?>

>

> Would you kindly quote the message number and date where I said that I

> had made correct predictions, since once we peruse that message in full,

> that will give the exact context as well as the answer that you are

> looking for.

>

> Pl note that it does not mean that I am denyin having made correct

> predictions, but all it means is that everybody goes through a stage of

> evolution, whether it is in predictive gimmicks or spiritual vein or

> even in a materialistic sense.

>

> Jai Shri Ram

>

> A K Kaul

>

> , " rohinicrystal " <jyotish_vani@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Kaul Saheb,

> >

> > Were you pulling our collective leg recently when you were talking

> about your ephemeris and your predictions based on that?

> >

> > Or was that a technicality that we/I missed? Namely, that you are an

> astrologer but just not into jyotish?

> >

> > Please clarify to clear my misunderstanding. I have great admiration

> for all astrologers and divinators who perform and give good predictions

> and advice to others. Are you one that would rise in that broad

> category?

> >

> > Thanks in advance for taking the time out of your busy schedule :-)

> >

> > RR_

> >

> > , " Krishen " jyotirved@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Shri Vinay Jha ji,

> > >

> > > Jai Shri Ram!

> > >

> > > <It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone, (that)

> > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha>

> > >

> > > I never claimed to be a Vedic astrologer, nor did I ask anybody to

> teach

> > > me the same! So how and why is your comment addressed " for me " ?

> > >

> > > I just asked you to explain as to how you had arrived at a

> particular

> > > ayanamsha for a particular date and whether it was plus or minus and

> so

> > > on. Does that mean a shastrartha?

> > >

> > > My dear friend, instead of hair-splitting and resorting to all the

> hue

> > > and cry unnecessarily, it would have been much better for everybody

> if

> > > you had answered the fifteen points raised by me.

> > >

> > > Pl. do it now.

> > >

> > > Jai Shri Ram

> > >

> > > A K Kaul

> > >

> > > , " VJha " <vinayjhaa16@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Shri Kaul Ji,

> > > >

> > > > My statement was :

> > > >

> > > > <<<

> > > > Unless and untill you qualify in this test, you are a failure in

> > > > SIDDHAANTA skandha of Vedic Jyotisha, and therefore not fit for

> either

> > > > learning Vedic Jyotisha or participating in any shaastraartha.

> > > > >>>

> > > >

> > > > It was specificqally addressed for you and not for everyone,

> because I

> > > > also stated that you are " Abusing " frauds " like me " . One cannot

> learn

> > > > anything from a person by means of abusing. But you deliberately

> > > > changed the context of my specific statement for an abuser and

> distort

> > > > it to become a general statement for everyone, which is not

> expressed

> > > in

> > > > my statement. Deceit, lie, abuse, etc are part of warfare, but you

> > > > missed following statement from me : " please give up warfare

> tactics

> > > and

> > > > set down to discussions like a real intellectual : the agenda of

> > > > discussion will be decided by that person who qualifies in

> SIDDHAANTA

> > > > skandha " .

> > > >

> > > > You have stated earlier that you were a jyotishi, but now you deny

> it

> > > > and apply my statement to be for all jyotishis. You are debating

> in

> > > > field of siddhanta jyotisha, hence you have no right to apply my

> > > > statement for those who do not pose as experts of sidddhanta.

> > > >

> > > > Your following statement is malafide :

> > > >

> > > > <<<

> > > > instead of spitting all the venom and a slanging match and blowing

> > > your

> > > > own trumpet, it would have been much better if you had answered

> the

> > > > fifteen points, one on one, that I had asked you, for the benefit

> of

> > > > everybody, since as per your own claims, you are a " parangata " in

> > > > sidhdanta jyotisha.

> > > > >>>

> > > >

> > > > You have enclosed the word " parangata " in direct speech, but I

> never

> > > > said said so. You will not feel ashamed for quoting me falsely.

> > > Whether

> > > > I am a parangata or not is not the point, the point is you are not

> a

> > > > parangata because you do not know the basics of siddhanta, yet you

> > > want

> > > > a debate on siddhanta. I am not your paid servant to to be under

> any

> > > > obligation to teach you siddhanta skandha at your order. I can

> answer

> > > > all your 15 questions, but it is a wastage of time because you are

> not

> > > a

> > > > real learner, you are prejudiced. Even more important is your

> fitness

> > > > for learning. If you cannot solve the traditional equations of

> > > > Graha-spashtikarana (finding True longitudes out of mean planets),

> > > which

> > > > is the most fundamental thing in Jyotisha, you are a cipher in

> this

> > > > field. Even if a person is cipher, it is welcome if one wants to

> > > learn.

> > > > But if a cipher poses as an expert and abuses knowledgeable

> persons,

> > > > then the person is a mere cheat and a fraud. You call all vedic

> > > > astrologers, including me, as frauds. Then you say you want to

> learn,

> > > > but still your language is insulting and warlike.

> > > >

> > > > Unless and until you solve the mandaphala equation, I am not going

> to

> > > > answer any question from you. You must either prove your fitness

> for a

> > > > shaastraartha in siddhanta, or discard your arrogance and become a

> > > true

> > > > learner (which you will never do).

> > > >

> > > > It is an astrological forum not meant for anti-astrologers. Why

> you

> > > fail

> > > > to understand that the only proof of astrology is ASTROLOGICAL

> TESTING

> > > > ??

> > > >

> > > > The following statement is fit on you " spitting all the venom and

> a

> > > > slanging match and blowing your own trumpet " . Who started abusing

> all

> > > > vedic astrologers ? Who is blowing his own trumpet by refusing to

> > > abide

> > > > by time honoured rules of shaastraartha ?? I know your

> intellectual

> > > > worth and moral integrity. I advise you to keep away from vedic

> > > > astrology if you hate it. This forum should not be allowed for

> > > spreading

> > > > venomous abuses against all vedic astrologers by an ignorant who

> is

> > > > incapable of explaining even the formula of equation of centre

> > > required

> > > > in making true planet from mean one.

> > > >

> > > > Sir, you can change the tone of this dialogue if you wish. The

> ball is

> > > > in your court. But you HATE all vedic astrologers, hence I do not

> hope

> > > > any change in your offensive language.

> > > >

> > > > -VJ

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

> > > > , " jyotirved " jyotirved@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Shri vinay Jhaji,

> > > > >

> > > > > Jai Shri Ram!

> > >

> >

>

Sign In

Fwd: Jyotishis Vs Shri Avtar Krishen Kaul - 2

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads