[USBrahmins] FW: The Views of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet

[Guest guest]

Dear friends,

 

I believe that if one gives the the name of the book from which one quotes that

is still creditable and if one gives the reference to the verses it is

admirable. If one does not give the exact verse it does not matter as one who is

keen on the subject can always find out. Not quoting verse cannot be an issue.

Jyotirved falsely claims he has read the Vedas and the Shastras. He always

misinterprets the verses. He is poor in Sanskrit as I have shown earlier.

 

1)

That the rashis are Nirayana is shown in Vamana purana, a fifth Veda text and

even if Jyotirved goes on trying life after life he will not be able to prove it

to the contrary and I am sure Lord Rama will not tolerate the misinterpretation

of the Vamana Purana. One cannot pit any other authority other than the four

Vedas to contest the Vamana purana.

 

2)

Magha is related to Purnima in the Magha nakshatra and this makes it

Sidereal.Let Jyotirved go on claiming Magha to be Sayana and that does not mean

anything to the people who knows this relation.

 

3)

Kaushitaki did say that the Magha Amavashya and Winter solstice coincided.

Jyotirved  does not know that Mahashivaratri is celebrated in the 14th tithi of

Magha Krishnapaksha (ie. the tithi before the Magha Amavashya). Had he known

that he would have understood what I said. As I said before " Samazdaroke liye

Ishaaraahi kafi ha " and the Jyotirved is not one of them. If one gives the

reference the norms are satisfied.

 

4)

Jyotirved earlier referred to a verse by Manu where Manu had barred the

practitioners of Astrology from being invited to Pitri karya. Does that not mean

that there were Astrologers in the times of Manu. But Jyotirved made

self-contradictory statement that Astrology was not mentioned by Manu. Such are

his statements defying common sense and logic.

 

5)

why is Jyotirved mentioning only one type of month of the Vedanga Jyotisha . The

Vedanga Jyotisha mentions two types of months ie the Sayana  month of Tapas,

which started from the new Moon and also the Nirayana month of Magha.

Jyotirved's calling the  nakshatras as imaginary will not make the

imaginary.   Like the Vaman purana even Claudius Ptolemy also considered 

Aldevaran (Rohini)  to be at the middle of Taurus (Vrishava). The Aldevaran

Rohini) is not an imaginary nakshatra. Taurus is one of the twelve divisions of

the zodiac corresponding to the Vrishava Rashi. Thus Claudius Ptolemy was also

referring to the sidereal Zodiac. The western astrologers later on  opted for

the use of the Tropical Zodiac for their application. Tropical Zodiac considers

only the Solar system, whereas the Sidereal system considers the entire universe

including the Solar system. The Hindu Jyotisha is based on the Sidereal system.

The merits and demerits of these two

systems of astrology is not our concern here, when we discuss the calendar.

 

6)

Jyotirved wanted to justify the celebration of Makar Sankranti on the date the

Sun changes its gati from the Makar rekha. Now he admits that Makar Rekha is not

to be found in the ancient texts as we know and he also accepts that now. The

Makar Rekha has no relation with Makar Sankranti, which is observed on the day

the Sun enters the Makar Rashi. In the 31st cenbtury BCE (ie. the century in

which the Mahabhatrata war took place) the Sun entered the Makar rashi in the

Dakshinayana and any astronomer will tell you that. Thus Makar Sankranti has no

permanent relation with the Uttarayana.

 

7)

Good that Jyotirved has now  admitted  that the Makar Rekha is not there in

the ancient shastras. If he would have continued to evade that then nobody would

have read his mail and I am sure about that.

 

Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

--- On Sat, 11/28/09, jyotirved <jyotirved wrote:

 

jyotirved <jyotirved

[uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

usbrahmins

Saturday, November 28, 2009, 3:28 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shri Sunil

Bhattacharjyaji,

 

Jai Shri Ram!

 

<The

Mahashivaratri is to be observed in the month of Magha  and the month Magha

is Sidereal. The required data is given in the Purana in terms of the Sidereal

calendar.>

 

I have already

clarified it several times that there was no so called sidereal or tropical

calendar as per the puranas!  The Puranas copied definition of all the

Rashis from the Surya Sidhanta without changing a whit!  And the

definition of Mesha etc. Rashis as per the Surya Sidhanta is nothing but

so called sayana!  Puranas also appended lunar months like Chaitra,

Vaishakha etc. to those very Sayana months. 

 

Why don't you

take some trouble and go through the documents like B VB6, 1999b, Rashi5 etc.

which are in the files section.  Or is it that you have already gone

through them and still insist on the so called nirayana, which you call

sidereal rashis, in the Puranas and siddhantas also in spite of the fact that

those rashis are sayana?

 

There is also

Alberuni’s India document in the files section.  Pl. go through it and you

will see that in eleventh century India also only so called sayana rashis were

used for not only celebrating festivals but even phalita jyotisha!  Even

Ashvini, Bharni nakshatras were clubbed with those sayana rashis in eleventh

century India!

 

 < As

regards the Kaushitaki Brahmana have patience if you could not lay hands on

that till now and read it when you get it. Don't expect to be spoon-fed

everytime. >

 

The norms of a

debate are that you have to substantiate your premise with proofs and not ask

the other party to look for the proofs himself.  To the best of my

knowledge, there is no mantra in Kaushitaki Brahmana which states that

Mahashivaratri is to be celebrated on the day of Winter Solstice, and unless

you quote the original mantra with translation, I will stand by my contention.

 

<Stop

forthwith your this type of harmful anti-vedic assertions without adducing any

evidence. If you have read Rig Veda, as you claim to have done, then you must

have noticed that Rig Veda says that " Moon is the maker of the

month " . The Lunar month is as old as the Rig Veda>.

 

Yes, when the

“moon enters/joins/ lives with the sun†it is known as Amavasya†as per

the

Vedas.  And as per the Vedanga Jyotisham also, a new lunar months starts

with New Moon.  But where has it been said in the Rigveda or any other

Veda or the Vedanga Jyotisha etc. that the lunar month Chaitra is Chaitra only

because the Full Moon after fifteen days of  the start of that month will

be in an imaginary equal twenty-seventh division known as Chitra of a still

more imaginary circle called zodiac?  Unless and until you substantiate your

arguments with proofs citing the original Vedic mantras with their translations

that Chaitra is Chaitra only because the Full Moon after fifteen days of the

start of that month is in Chitra, your statement has absolutely no value.

 

Then again, you

have to tell the forum members as to what you mean by Chitra nakshtra, i.e.

whether it is  supposed to be subsumed in a so called nirayana rashi or a

so called sayana rashi?  If it is the latter, what ayanamsha should we

choose and why?  What is the support of the Vedic mantras to justify your

arguments?

 

As already

pointed out, even in eleventh century India,  twenty-seven equal nakshatra

division  were being linked to sayana rashis.  So do you mean to say

that in the Vedic period also they decided the nomenclature of lunar months by

dint of linking Krittika etc. nakshatras, which you call sidereal, to sayana

rashis?  Pl. clarify your stand in unambiguous terms.

 

<You tried

to justify celebration of Makar Sankranti on the shortest day by mentioning the

Makar Rekha and now you have miserably failed to show the mention of the

" Makar Rekha' In any of the ancient texts>

 

You have a very

bad habit of ascribing such statements to others as were never made by

them.  As clarified already, how can you expect to find Makar Rekha in any

shastra if the term Makar Sankranti itself is an import via Surya Sidhanta from

a country other than India?  Makar Rekha is a “tatsam†equivalent of

“Tropic of Capricorn†which you can find described in detail in Primary

level

geography books.

 

< Nobody

will read a single line of yours until you show where you found mention of the

Makar rekha in the ancient shastras.>

 

If wishes were

horse beggars would ride them!

 

Jai Shri Ram!

 

A

K Kaul

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- On Sat, 11/28/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

 

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

Re: [uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

USBrahmins

Saturday, November 28, 2009, 9:02 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear friends,

 

 

 

I believe that if one gives the the name of the book from which one quotes that

is still creditable and if one gives the reference to the verses it is

admirable. If one does not give the exact verse it does not matter as one who is

keen on the subject can always find out. Not quoting verse cannot be an issue.

Jyotirved falsely claims he has read the Vedas and the Shastras. He always

misinterprets the verses. He is poor in Sanskrit as I have shown earlier.

 

 

 

1)

 

That the rashis are Nirayana is shown in Vamana purana, a fifth Veda text and

even if Jyotirved goes on trying life after life he will not be able to prove it

to the contrary and I am sure Lord Rama will not tolerate the misinterpretation

of the Vamana Purana. One cannot pit any other authority other than the four

Vedas to contest the Vamana purana.

 

 

 

2)

 

Magha is related to Purnima in the Magha nakshatra and this makes it

Sidereal.Let Jyotirved go on claiming Magha to be Sayana and that does not mean

anything to the people who knows this relation.

 

 

 

3)

 

Kaushitaki did say that the Magha Amavashya and Winter solstice coincided.

Jyotirved  does not know that Mahashivaratri is celebrated in the 14th tithi of

Magha Krishnapaksha (ie. the tithi before the Magha Amavashya). Had he known

that he would have understood what I said. As I said before " Samazdaroke liye

Ishaaraahi kafi ha " and the Jyotirved is not one of them. If one gives the

reference the norms are satisfied.

 

 

 

4)

 

Jyotirved earlier referred to a verse by Manu where Manu had barred the

practitioners of Astrology from being invited to Pitri karya. Does that not mean

that there were Astrologers in the times of Manu. But Jyotirved made

self-contradictory statement that Astrology was not mentioned by Manu. Such are

his statements defying common sense and logic.

 

 

 

5)

 

why is Jyotirved mentioning only one type of month of the Vedanga Jyotisha . The

Vedanga Jyotisha mentions two types of months ie the Sayana  month of Tapas,

which started from the new Moon and also the Nirayana month of Magha.

Jyotirved's calling the  nakshatras as imaginary will not make the

imaginary.   Like the Vaman purana even Claudius Ptolemy also considered 

Aldevaran (Rohini)  to be at the middle of Taurus (Vrishava). The Aldevaran

Rohini) is not an imaginary nakshatra. Taurus is one of the twelve divisions of

the zodiac corresponding to the Vrishava Rashi. Thus Claudius Ptolemy was also

referring to the sidereal Zodiac. The western astrologers later on  opted for

the use of the Tropical Zodiac for their application. Tropical Zodiac considers

only the Solar system, whereas the Sidereal system considers the entire universe

including the Solar system. The Hindu Jyotisha is based on the Sidereal system.

The merits and demerits of these two

 

systems of astrology is not our concern here, when we discuss the calendar.

 

 

 

6)

 

Jyotirved wanted to justify the celebration of Makar Sankranti on the date the

Sun changes its gati from the Makar rekha. Now he admits that Makar Rekha is not

to be found in the ancient texts as we know and he also accepts that now. The

Makar Rekha has no relation with Makar Sankranti, which is observed on the day

the Sun enters the Makar Rashi. In the 31st cenbtury BCE (ie. the century in

which the Mahabhatrata war took place) the Sun entered the Makar rashi in the

Dakshinayana and any astronomer will tell you that. Thus Makar Sankranti has no

permanent relation with the Uttarayana.

 

 

 

7)

 

Good that Jyotirved has now  admitted  that the Makar Rekha is not there in

the ancient shastras. If he would have continued to evade that then nobody would

have read his mail and I am sure about that.

 

 

 

Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya

 

 

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Sat, 11/28/09, jyotirved <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com> wrote:

 

 

 

jyotirved <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com>

 

[uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

 

usbrahmins@gro ups.com

 

Saturday, November 28, 2009, 3:28 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shri Sunil

 

Bhattacharjyaji,

 

 

 

Jai Shri Ram!

 

 

 

<The

 

Mahashivaratri is to be observed in the month of Magha  and the month Magha

 

is Sidereal. The required data is given in the Purana in terms of the Sidereal

 

calendar.>

 

 

 

I have already

 

clarified it several times that there was no so called sidereal or tropical

 

calendar as per the puranas!  The Puranas copied definition of all the

 

Rashis from the Surya Sidhanta without changing a whit!  And the

 

definition of Mesha etc. Rashis as per the Surya Sidhanta is nothing but

 

so called sayana!  Puranas also appended lunar months like Chaitra,

 

Vaishakha etc. to those very Sayana months. 

 

 

 

Why don't you

 

take some trouble and go through the documents like B VB6, 1999b, Rashi5 etc.

 

which are in the files section.  Or is it that you have already gone

 

through them and still insist on the so called nirayana, which you call

 

sidereal rashis, in the Puranas and siddhantas also in spite of the fact that

 

those rashis are sayana?

 

 

 

There is also

 

Alberuni’s India document in the files section.  Pl. go through it and you

 

will see that in eleventh century India also only so called sayana rashis were

 

used for not only celebrating festivals but even phalita jyotisha!  Even

 

Ashvini, Bharni nakshatras were clubbed with those sayana rashis in eleventh

 

century India!

 

 

 

 < As

 

regards the Kaushitaki Brahmana have patience if you could not lay hands on

 

that till now and read it when you get it. Don't expect to be spoon-fed

 

everytime. >

 

 

 

The norms of a

 

debate are that you have to substantiate your premise with proofs and not ask

 

the other party to look for the proofs himself.  To the best of my

 

knowledge, there is no mantra in Kaushitaki Brahmana which states that

 

Mahashivaratri is to be celebrated on the day of Winter Solstice, and unless

 

you quote the original mantra with translation, I will stand by my contention.

 

 

 

<Stop

 

forthwith your this type of harmful anti-vedic assertions without adducing any

 

evidence. If you have read Rig Veda, as you claim to have done, then you must

 

have noticed that Rig Veda says that " Moon is the maker of the

 

month " . The Lunar month is as old as the Rig Veda>.

 

 

 

Yes, when the

 

“moon enters/joins/ lives with the sun†it is known as Amavasya†as per

the

 

Vedas.  And as per the Vedanga Jyotisham also, a new lunar months starts

 

with New Moon.  But where has it been said in the Rigveda or any other

 

Veda or the Vedanga Jyotisha etc. that the lunar month Chaitra is Chaitra only

 

because the Full Moon after fifteen days of  the start of that month will

 

be in an imaginary equal twenty-seventh division known as Chitra of a still

 

more imaginary circle called zodiac?  Unless and until you substantiate your

 

arguments with proofs citing the original Vedic mantras with their translations

 

that Chaitra is Chaitra only because the Full Moon after fifteen days of the

 

start of that month is in Chitra, your statement has absolutely no value.

 

 

 

Then again, you

 

have to tell the forum members as to what you mean by Chitra nakshtra, i.e.

 

whether it is  supposed to be subsumed in a so called nirayana rashi or a

 

so called sayana rashi?  If it is the latter, what ayanamsha should we

 

choose and why?  What is the support of the Vedic mantras to justify your

 

arguments?

 

 

 

As already

 

pointed out, even in eleventh century India,  twenty-seven equal nakshatra

 

division  were being linked to sayana rashis.  So do you mean to say

 

that in the Vedic period also they decided the nomenclature of lunar months by

 

dint of linking Krittika etc. nakshatras, which you call sidereal, to sayana

 

rashis?  Pl. clarify your stand in unambiguous terms.

 

 

 

<You tried

 

to justify celebration of Makar Sankranti on the shortest day by mentioning the

 

Makar Rekha and now you have miserably failed to show the mention of the

 

" Makar Rekha' In any of the ancient texts>

 

 

 

You have a very

 

bad habit of ascribing such statements to others as were never made by

 

them.  As clarified already, how can you expect to find Makar Rekha in any

 

shastra if the term Makar Sankranti itself is an import via Surya Sidhanta from

 

a country other than India?  Makar Rekha is a “tatsam†equivalent of

 

“Tropic of Capricorn†which you can find described in detail in Primary

level

 

geography books.

 

 

 

< Nobody

 

will read a single line of yours until you show where you found mention of the

 

Makar rekha in the ancient shastras.>

 

 

 

If wishes were

 

horse beggars would ride them!

 

 

 

Jai Shri Ram!

 

 

 

A

 

K Kaul

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhattachryaji,

 

Your following statements does bring you quite near the truth that sayan and

nirayan concepts are to be coupled or coordinated. Then why are you against

coordinating them?

 

<<2) Magha is related to Purnima in the Magha nakshatra and this makes it

Sidereal.Let Jyotirved go on claiming Magha to be Sayana and that does not mean

anything to the people who knows this relation.

3)Kaushitaki did say that the Magha Amavashya and Winter solstice coincided.

5) why is Jyotirved mentioning only one type of month of the Vedanga Jyotisha .

The Vedanga Jyotisha mentions two types of months ie the Sayana month of

Tapas, which started from the new Moon and also the Nirayana month of Magha.>>

Since you know all the above facts,why do you not think they are to be

coordinated. What do you make of the so many factors occurring together in the

sixth sloka of Vedanga jyotish. Was it just accidentally put that way or did

they intend that all those are to be coordinated?

 

Regards,

Hari Malla

 

 

 

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

>

>

> --- On Sat, 11/28/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

> Re: [uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

> USBrahmins

> Saturday, November 28, 2009, 9:02 PM

>

 

>

>

>

Dear friends,

>

>

>

> I believe that if one gives the the name of the book from which one quotes

that is still creditable and if one gives the reference to the verses it is

admirable. If one does not give the exact verse it does not matter as one who is

keen on the subject can always find out. Not quoting verse cannot be an issue.

Jyotirved falsely claims he has read the Vedas and the Shastras. He always

misinterprets the verses. He is poor in Sanskrit as I have shown earlier.

>

>

>

> 1)

>

> That the rashis are Nirayana is shown in Vamana purana, a fifth Veda text and

even if Jyotirved goes on trying life after life he will not be able to prove it

to the contrary and I am sure Lord Rama will not tolerate the misinterpretation

of the Vamana Purana. One cannot pit any other authority other than the four

Vedas to contest the Vamana purana.

>

>

>

> 2)

>

> Magha is related to Purnima in the Magha nakshatra and this makes it

Sidereal.Let Jyotirved go on claiming Magha to be Sayana and that does not mean

anything to the people who knows this relation.

>

>

>

> 3)

>

> Kaushitaki did say that the Magha Amavashya and Winter solstice coincided.

Jyotirved  does not know that Mahashivaratri is celebrated in the 14th tithi of

Magha Krishnapaksha (ie. the tithi before the Magha Amavashya). Had he known

that he would have understood what I said. As I said before " Samazdaroke liye

Ishaaraahi kafi ha " and the Jyotirved is not one of them. If one gives the

reference the norms are satisfied.

>

>

>

> 4)

>

> Jyotirved earlier referred to a verse by Manu where Manu had barred the

practitioners of Astrology from being invited to Pitri karya. Does that not mean

that there were Astrologers in the times of Manu. But Jyotirved made

self-contradictory statement that Astrology was not mentioned by Manu. Such are

his statements defying common sense and logic.

>

>

>

> 5)

>

> why is Jyotirved mentioning only one type of month of the Vedanga Jyotisha .

The Vedanga Jyotisha mentions two types of months ie the Sayana  month of

Tapas, which started from the new Moon and also the Nirayana month of Magha.

Jyotirved's calling the  nakshatras as imaginary will not make the

imaginary.   Like the Vaman purana even Claudius Ptolemy also considered 

Aldevaran (Rohini)  to be at the middle of Taurus (Vrishava). The Aldevaran

Rohini) is not an imaginary nakshatra. Taurus is one of the twelve divisions of

the zodiac corresponding to the Vrishava Rashi. Thus Claudius Ptolemy was also

referring to the sidereal Zodiac. The western astrologers later on  opted for

the use of the Tropical Zodiac for their application. Tropical Zodiac considers

only the Solar system, whereas the Sidereal system considers the entire universe

including the Solar system. The Hindu Jyotisha is based on the Sidereal system.

The merits and demerits of these two

>

> systems of astrology is not our concern here, when we discuss the calendar.

>

>

>

> 6)

>

> Jyotirved wanted to justify the celebration of Makar Sankranti on the date the

Sun changes its gati from the Makar rekha. Now he admits that Makar Rekha is not

to be found in the ancient texts as we know and he also accepts that now. The

Makar Rekha has no relation with Makar Sankranti, which is observed on the day

the Sun enters the Makar Rashi. In the 31st cenbtury BCE (ie. the century in

which the Mahabhatrata war took place) the Sun entered the Makar rashi in the

Dakshinayana and any astronomer will tell you that. Thus Makar Sankranti has no

permanent relation with the Uttarayana.

>

>

>

> 7)

>

> Good that Jyotirved has now  admitted  that the Makar Rekha is not there in

the ancient shastras. If he would have continued to evade that then nobody would

have read his mail and I am sure about that.

>

>

>

> Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya

>

>

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

>

>

> --- On Sat, 11/28/09, jyotirved <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com> wrote:

>

>

>

> jyotirved <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com>

>

> [uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

>

> usbrahmins@gro ups.com

>

> Saturday, November 28, 2009, 3:28 AM

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Shri Sunil

>

> Bhattacharjyaji,

>

>

>

> Jai Shri Ram!

>

>

>

> <The

>

> Mahashivaratri is to be observed in the month of Magha  and the month Magha

>

> is Sidereal. The required data is given in the Purana in terms of the Sidereal

>

> calendar.>

>

>

>

> I have already

>

> clarified it several times that there was no so called sidereal or tropical

>

> calendar as per the puranas!  The Puranas copied definition of all the

>

> Rashis from the Surya Sidhanta without changing a whit!  And the

>

> definition of Mesha etc. Rashis as per the Surya Sidhanta is nothing but

>

> so called sayana!  Puranas also appended lunar months like Chaitra,

>

> Vaishakha etc. to those very Sayana months. 

>

>

>

> Why don't you

>

> take some trouble and go through the documents like B VB6, 1999b, Rashi5 etc.

>

> which are in the files section.  Or is it that you have already gone

>

> through them and still insist on the so called nirayana, which you call

>

> sidereal rashis, in the Puranas and siddhantas also in spite of the fact that

>

> those rashis are sayana?

>

>

>

> There is also

>

> Alberuni’s India document in the files section.  Pl. go through it and you

>

> will see that in eleventh century India also only so called sayana rashis were

>

> used for not only celebrating festivals but even phalita jyotisha!  Even

>

> Ashvini, Bharni nakshatras were clubbed with those sayana rashis in eleventh

>

> century India!

>

>

>

>  < As

>

> regards the Kaushitaki Brahmana have patience if you could not lay hands on

>

> that till now and read it when you get it. Don't expect to be spoon-fed

>

> everytime. >

>

>

>

> The norms of a

>

> debate are that you have to substantiate your premise with proofs and not ask

>

> the other party to look for the proofs himself.  To the best of my

>

> knowledge, there is no mantra in Kaushitaki Brahmana which states that

>

> Mahashivaratri is to be celebrated on the day of Winter Solstice, and unless

>

> you quote the original mantra with translation, I will stand by my contention.

>

>

>

> <Stop

>

> forthwith your this type of harmful anti-vedic assertions without adducing any

>

> evidence. If you have read Rig Veda, as you claim to have done, then you must

>

> have noticed that Rig Veda says that " Moon is the maker of the

>

> month " . The Lunar month is as old as the Rig Veda>.

>

>

>

> Yes, when the

>

> “moon enters/joins/ lives with the sun†it is known as Amavasya†as per

the

>

> Vedas.  And as per the Vedanga Jyotisham also, a new lunar months starts

>

> with New Moon.  But where has it been said in the Rigveda or any other

>

> Veda or the Vedanga Jyotisha etc. that the lunar month Chaitra is Chaitra only

>

> because the Full Moon after fifteen days of  the start of that month will

>

> be in an imaginary equal twenty-seventh division known as Chitra of a still

>

> more imaginary circle called zodiac?  Unless and until you substantiate your

>

> arguments with proofs citing the original Vedic mantras with their

translations

>

> that Chaitra is Chaitra only because the Full Moon after fifteen days of the

>

> start of that month is in Chitra, your statement has absolutely no value.

>

>

>

> Then again, you

>

> have to tell the forum members as to what you mean by Chitra nakshtra, i.e.

>

> whether it is  supposed to be subsumed in a so called nirayana rashi or a

>

> so called sayana rashi?  If it is the latter, what ayanamsha should we

>

> choose and why?  What is the support of the Vedic mantras to justify your

>

> arguments?

>

>

>

> As already

>

> pointed out, even in eleventh century India,  twenty-seven equal nakshatra

>

> division  were being linked to sayana rashis.  So do you mean to say

>

> that in the Vedic period also they decided the nomenclature of lunar months by

>

> dint of linking Krittika etc. nakshatras, which you call sidereal, to sayana

>

> rashis?  Pl. clarify your stand in unambiguous terms.

>

>

>

> <You tried

>

> to justify celebration of Makar Sankranti on the shortest day by mentioning

the

>

> Makar Rekha and now you have miserably failed to show the mention of the

>

> " Makar Rekha' In any of the ancient texts>

>

>

>

> You have a very

>

> bad habit of ascribing such statements to others as were never made by

>

> them.  As clarified already, how can you expect to find Makar Rekha in any

>

> shastra if the term Makar Sankranti itself is an import via Surya Sidhanta

from

>

> a country other than India?  Makar Rekha is a “tatsam†equivalent of

>

> “Tropic of Capricorn†which you can find described in detail in Primary

level

>

> geography books.

>

>

>

> < Nobody

>

> will read a single line of yours until you show where you found mention of the

>

> Makar rekha in the ancient shastras.>

>

>

>

> If wishes were

>

> horse beggars would ride them!

>

>

>

> Jai Shri Ram!

>

>

>

> A

>

> K Kaul

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear friends,

Jai Shri Ram!

<If one does not

give the exact verse it does not matter >

No, it does

matter. Unless and until Shri Bhattacharjya gives the original mantra

from Kaushitaki Brahman together with its translation that says that

Mahashivaratri is to be celebrated on the Uttarayana Day, his statement is

nothing but a tissue of lies!

<That the rashis

are Nirayana is shown in Vamana purana, a fifth Veda text >

Again the same

statement being parroted for the umpteenth time! He has been told times

without number that the Mesha etc. rashis in the Puranas are a ditto copy of

the Surya Sidhanta by Maya the mlechha and the Rashis in the siddhantas and 

therefore Puranas too are  Sayana. Asvhini, Bharni etc. nakshatras

divisions were subsumed in those very Sayana Rashis by Maya the mlechha in his

Surya Siddhanta and Vamana Purana has done the same thing! So what is

" sidereal " or " tropical " about it! On the other hand,

it proves what I have been repeating times without number---the rashis in the

siddhantas, in spite of being Sayana, included Ashvini, Bharni etc.

nakshatras! That very thing has been confirmed by Alberuni that in

eleventh century India (Sayana) rashis were used and they included

nakshtras!

As such, Shri

Bhattacharjya is corroborating my findings!

< Magha is related

to Purnima in the Magha nakshatra and this makes it Sidereal. Let Jyotirved go

on claiming Magha to be Sayana and that does not mean anything to the people

who knows this relation.>

It appears that none

of the members read Shri Bhattacharjya’s posts as they would otherwise

have contested his fallacious and even malicious views! Anybody who has

read  BVB6, Rashi5, Koshur6, 1999b etc. documents is by now aware that the

Vedic and Puaranic lunar Magha starts with the first New Moon on or after the 

Uttarayana Day, which is also known as the starting day of Tapah and solar

Magha.  Similarly, the first New Moon  after the month of  Tapasya is known as

lunar Phalguna and so on.  There is nothing nirayana about them nor is there

any condition involved in it that the name of Magha Shukla paksha will be

decided only after it has been ascertained that a month after that date, the

Full Moon will be in one of the twenty-seven imaginary portions known as Magha

of yet another imaginary circle known as ecliptic.

< Kaushitaki did

say that the Magha Amavashya and Winter solstice coincided. Jyotirved

does not know that Mahashivaratri is celebrated in the 14th tithi of Magha

Krishnapaksha (ie. the tithi before the Magha Amavashya). >

The criteria for

Mahashivaratri that I have provided do say that Mahashivaratri is to be

celebrated on Magha (Gauna Phalguna) Krishna Chaturdashi. As such,

it is a surprising comment from Shri Bhattacharjya that I do not know that

Mahashivaratri is celebrated on the 14th tithi of Magha Krishna paksha!

On the other hand,

Shri Bhattacharjya has to prove that Kaushitaki Brahman has said that Magha

Krishna Amavasya coincided with Uttarayana!  It is actually an impossible

situation as per the Vedanga Jyotisha and even other Vedic texts!  Shri

Bhattacharjya is trying to prove the impossible that during the period of

Kaushitaki Brahamna, a part of the Rig-vedic text, Magha Shukla paksha started one

month before Uttarayana and the Uttarayana day would thus have coincided with

Phalguna Shukla Pratipat instead of Magha Shukla Pratipat!  THAT IS WHY I

ALWAYS INSIST ON SHRI BHATTACHARJYA QUOTING THE EXACT MANTRAS WITH THEIR

ENGLISH TRANSLATION, since he is taking everybody for a ride otherwise!

<why is Jyotirved

mentioning only one type of month of the Vedanga Jyotisha.  The Vedanga

Jyotisha mentions two types of months ie the Sayana month of Tapas,

which started from the new Moon and also the Nirayana month of Magha.>

Here also Shri

Bhattacharjya is caught on the wrong foot by his own misinterpretations of the

Vedic mantras!  As per the Vedanga Jyotisha fifth mantra, “When the sun

and the moon while moving in the sky, come to Dhanishtha star together, then

the yuga, the Magha, the Tapas, the bright half of the month and the winter

solstice, all commence together”.

So what is nirayana

about it?  The winter solstice coincided with the lunar  Magha Shukla

Pratipat!  Is that nirayana? THAT IS IN FACT THE REAL SAYANA! 

The solar seasonal

month of Tapas, viz. the first month of Shishira ritu, coincided with

Uttarayana!  Is that nirayana?  That itself means that  the lunar  Magha Shukla

pratipat coincided with the month of Tapas, which according to Shri Bhattacharjya

himself is Sayana!  So what is  nirayana about any of these phenomena?  If

there had been any nirayana sickness around then, the Winter solstice would

have been later by about a month after the lunar Magha.

<Jyotirved earlier

referred to a verse by Manu where Manu had barred the practitioners of

Astrology from being invited to Pitri karya. Does that not mean that there were

Astrologers in the times of Manu. But Jyotirved made self-contradictory

statement that Astrology was not mentioned by Manu. Such are his statements

defying common sense and logic.>

This is the usual

habit of Shri Bhattacharjya to twist and misinterpret every statement!  There

were actually no Mesha etc. Rashis but only Krittika, Rohini etc. nakshatras at

the time of the Manusmriti. And that is what I keep on repeating that Mesha

etc. Rashis were an import of a much later date and they are replicated in the

Puranas as a ditto copy of the Surya Sidhanta!  That is why the Manu has not

called  phalita-jyotishis as “Vedic astrologers” but just as

nakshatra soochis/jeevis, perhaps on the basis of works like Atharva-Veda

Parishsishta.

Besides, the Manu has

not only barred practitioners from being invited to Pitri-Kriya, but  he has

categorically castigated nakshtra jeevis in the following words in 3rd

adhyaya, 162 Shloka,

" hasti

go ashva ushtra damako NAKSHATRAIR YASHCHA JEEVATI, pakshinam poshako yashchai,

yudhacharyas tathaiva chai.. "

This

shloka in the Manusmriti is actually in the context about as to which people

are to be debarred from performing diava and pitrya karyas i.e. yajnyas etc for

gods and oblations etc. for the Manes, and the Manu has said unequivocally

" Trainers of elephants, cows, horses; ANYONE WHO EARNS HIS LIVELIHOOD BY

DINT OF NAKSHATRAS and one who puts birds into cages are not allowed to perform

any daiva or pitra karya "

The

Hindi translator of Kshemraj Shri Krishendas, Bombay, edition of the Manusmriti

has translated the above shloka as follows, “haathi, bail, ghoda

aur oont – in sabko sikhane wale aur JYOTISH SE JEEVIKA

KARNE-WALE—yeh sab shubha karya main varjit hain”.

Is this the permission that the Manu is supposed to have granted these

" Vedic astrologers " for fleecing hte gullible?

It

is not only the Manu who has castigated nakshatra soochis/jeevis but even Bhishma

was ruthless about nakshatra-soochis.  But about all that in a separate post.

THE PROBLEM WITH

PEOPLE LIKE SHRI BHATTACHARJYA IS THAT THEY GO ON DISCUSSING A TOPIC FOR AEONS

TOGETHER WITHOUT HAVING READ, MUCH LESS PONDERED ON THE ORIGINAL WORK!

But what about the

members of the forums?  Why are they tolerating such an ignorance in the name

of facts and figures?  That is the million dollar question.

Jai Shri Ram!

A K Kaul

---

In , Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

Dear

friends,

 

I believe that if one gives the the name of the book from which one quotes that

is still creditable and if one gives the reference to the verses it is

admirable. If one does not give the exact verse it does not matter as one who

is

keen on the subject can always find out. Not quoting verse cannot be an issue.

Jyotirved falsely claims he has read the Vedas and the Shastras. He always

misinterprets the verses. He is poor in Sanskrit as I have shown earlier.

 

1)

That the rashis are Nirayana is shown in Vamana purana, a fifth Veda text and

even if Jyotirved goes on trying life after life he will not be able to prove

it

to the contrary and I am sure Lord Rama will not tolerate the misinterpretation

of the Vamana Purana. One cannot pit any other authority other than the four

Vedas to contest the Vamana purana.

 

2)

Magha is related to Purnima in the Magha nakshatra and this makes it

Sidereal.Let Jyotirved go on claiming Magha to be Sayana and that does not mean

anything to the people who knows this relation.

 

3)

Kaushitaki did say that the Magha Amavashya and Winter solstice coincided.

Jyotirved does not know that Mahashivaratri is celebrated in the 14th

tithi of

Magha Krishnapaksha (ie. the tithi before the Magha Amavashya). Had he known

that he would have understood what I said. As I said before " Samazdaroke

liye

Ishaaraahi kafi ha " and the Jyotirved is not one of them. If one gives the

reference the norms are satisfied.

 

4)

Jyotirved earlier referred to a verse by Manu where Manu had barred the

practitioners of Astrology from being invited to Pitri karya. Does that not mean

that there were Astrologers in the times of Manu. But Jyotirved made

self-contradictory statement that Astrology was not mentioned by Manu. Such are

his statements defying common sense and logic.

 

5)

why is Jyotirved mentioning only one type of month of the Vedanga Jyotisha .

The

Vedanga Jyotisha mentions two types of months ie the Sayana month of

Tapas,

which started from the new Moon and also the Nirayana month of Magha.

Jyotirved's calling the nakshatras as imaginary will not make the

imaginary.  Like the Vaman purana even Claudius Ptolemy also

consideredÂ

Aldevaran (Rohini)Â to be at the middle of Taurus (Vrishava). The

Aldevaran

Rohini) is not an imaginary nakshatra. Taurus is one of the twelve divisions of

the zodiac corresponding to the Vrishava Rashi. Thus Claudius Ptolemy was also

referring to the sidereal Zodiac. The western astrologers later on opted

for

the use of the Tropical Zodiac for their application. Tropical Zodiac considers

only the Solar system, whereas the Sidereal system considers the entire

universe

including the Solar system. The Hindu Jyotisha is based on the Sidereal system.

The merits and demerits of these two

systems of astrology is not our concern here, when we discuss the calendar.

 

6)

Jyotirved wanted to justify the celebration of Makar Sankranti on the date the

Sun changes its gati from the Makar rekha. Now he admits that Makar Rekha is

not

to be found in the ancient texts as we know and he also accepts that now. The

Makar Rekha has no relation with Makar Sankranti, which is observed on the day

the Sun enters the Makar Rashi. In the 31st cenbtury BCE (ie. the century in

which the Mahabhatrata war took place) the Sun entered the Makar rashi in the

Dakshinayana and any astronomer will tell you that. Thus Makar Sankranti has no

permanent relation with the Uttarayana.

 

7)

Good that Jyotirved has now admitted that the Makar Rekha is not

there in

the ancient shastras. If he would have continued to evade that then nobody

would

have read his mail and I am sure about that.

 

Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

--- On Sat, 11/28/09, jyotirved <jyotirved

wrote:

 

jyotirved <jyotirved

[uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

usbrahmins

Saturday, November 28, 2009, 3:28 AM

[Guest guest]

Sunil Ji,

 

It's unfair to call Mr. Kaul a samaj drohi etc, we can have different level of

understanding and approaches but this sort of name calling is not good.

 

He is very particular on his views, this is not a bad trait, however, timely

review of self opinion and receptiveness is appreciated for everbody

 

Regards,

Utkal

 

JyotishGrQoup , Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

>

>

> --- On Sat, 11/28/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

> Re: [uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

> USBrahmins

> Saturday, November 28, 2009, 9:02 PM

>

 

>

>

>

Dear friends,

>

>

>

> I believe that if one gives the the name of the book from which one quotes

that is still creditable and if one gives the reference to the verses it is

admirable. If one does not give the exact verse it does not matter as one who is

keen on the subject can always find out. Not quoting verse cannot be an issue.

Jyotirved falsely claims he has read the Vedas and the Shastras. He always

misinterprets the verses. He is poor in Sanskrit as I have shown earlier.

>

>

>

> 1)

>

> That the rashis are Nirayana is shown in Vamana purana, a fifth Veda text and

even if Jyotirved goes on trying life after life he will not be able to prove it

to the contrary and I am sure Lord Rama will not tolerate the misinterpretation

of the Vamana Purana. One cannot pit any other authority other than the four

Vedas to contest the Vamana purana.

>

>

>

> 2)

>

> Magha is related to Purnima in the Magha nakshatra and this makes it

Sidereal.Let Jyotirved go on claiming Magha to be Sayana and that does not mean

anything to the people who knows this relation.

>

>

>

> 3)

>

> Kaushitaki did say that the Magha Amavashya and Winter solstice coincided.

Jyotirved  does not know that Mahashivaratri is celebrated in the 14th tithi of

Magha Krishnapaksha (ie. the tithi before the Magha Amavashya). Had he known

that he would have understood what I said. As I said before " Samazdaroke liye

Ishaaraahi kafi ha " and the Jyotirved is not one of them. If one gives the

reference the norms are satisfied.

>

>

>

> 4)

>

> Jyotirved earlier referred to a verse by Manu where Manu had barred the

practitioners of Astrology from being invited to Pitri karya. Does that not mean

that there were Astrologers in the times of Manu. But Jyotirved made

self-contradictory statement that Astrology was not mentioned by Manu. Such are

his statements defying common sense and logic.

>

>

>

> 5)

>

> why is Jyotirved mentioning only one type of month of the Vedanga Jyotisha .

The Vedanga Jyotisha mentions two types of months ie the Sayana  month of

Tapas, which started from the new Moon and also the Nirayana month of Magha.

Jyotirved's calling the  nakshatras as imaginary will not make the

imaginary.   Like the Vaman purana even Claudius Ptolemy also considered 

Aldevaran (Rohini)  to be at the middle of Taurus (Vrishava). The Aldevaran

Rohini) is not an imaginary nakshatra. Taurus is one of the twelve divisions of

the zodiac corresponding to the Vrishava Rashi. Thus Claudius Ptolemy was also

referring to the sidereal Zodiac. The western astrologers later on  opted for

the use of the Tropical Zodiac for their application. Tropical Zodiac considers

only the Solar system, whereas the Sidereal system considers the entire universe

including the Solar system. The Hindu Jyotisha is based on the Sidereal system.

The merits and demerits of these two

>

> systems of astrology is not our concern here, when we discuss the calendar.

>

>

>

> 6)

>

> Jyotirved wanted to justify the celebration of Makar Sankranti on the date the

Sun changes its gati from the Makar rekha. Now he admits that Makar Rekha is not

to be found in the ancient texts as we know and he also accepts that now. The

Makar Rekha has no relation with Makar Sankranti, which is observed on the day

the Sun enters the Makar Rashi. In the 31st cenbtury BCE (ie. the century in

which the Mahabhatrata war took place) the Sun entered the Makar rashi in the

Dakshinayana and any astronomer will tell you that. Thus Makar Sankranti has no

permanent relation with the Uttarayana.

>

>

>

> 7)

>

> Good that Jyotirved has now  admitted  that the Makar Rekha is not there in

the ancient shastras. If he would have continued to evade that then nobody would

have read his mail and I am sure about that.

>

>

>

> Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya

>

>

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

>

>

> --- On Sat, 11/28/09, jyotirved <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com> wrote:

>

>

>

> jyotirved <jyotirved (AT) sify (DOT) com>

>

> [uSBrahmins] FW: Re: The Views of Patrizia

Norelli-Bachelet

>

> usbrahmins@gro ups.com

>

> Saturday, November 28, 2009, 3:28 AM

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Shri Sunil

>

> Bhattacharjyaji,

>

>

>

> Jai Shri Ram!

>

>

>

> <The

>

> Mahashivaratri is to be observed in the month of Maghaà and the month Magha

>

> is Sidereal. The required data is given in the Purana in terms of the Sidereal

>

> calendar.>

>

>

>

> I have already

>

> clarified it several times that there was no so called sidereal or tropical

>

> calendar as per the puranas!  The Puranas copied definition of all the

>

> Rashis from the Surya Sidhanta without changing a whit!  And the

>

> definition of Mesha etc. Rashis as per the Surya Sidhanta is nothing but

>

> so called sayana!  Puranas also appended lunar months like Chaitra,

>

> Vaishakha etc. to those very Sayana months. 

>

>

>

> Why don't you

>

> take some trouble and go through the documents like B VB6, 1999b, Rashi5 etc.

>

> which are in the files section.  Or is it that you have already gone

>

> through them and still insist on the so called nirayana, which you call

>

> sidereal rashis, in the Puranas and siddhantas also in spite of the fact that

>

> those rashis are sayana?

>

>

>

> There is also

>

> Alberuniâs India document in the files section.  Pl. go through it and you

>

> will see that in eleventh century India also only so called sayana rashis were

>

> used for not only celebrating festivals but even phalita jyotisha!  Even

>

> Ashvini, Bharni nakshatras were clubbed with those sayana rashis in eleventh

>

> century India!

>

>

>

>  < As

>

> regards the Kaushitaki Brahmana have patience if you could not lay hands on

>

> that till now and read it when you get it. Don't expect to be spoon-fed

>

> everytime.à>

>

>

>

> The norms of a

>

> debate are that you have to substantiate your premise with proofs and not ask

>

> the other party to look for the proofs himself.  To the best of my

>

> knowledge, there is no mantra in Kaushitaki Brahmana which states that

>

> Mahashivaratri is to be celebrated on the day of Winter Solstice, and unless

>

> you quote the original mantra with translation, I will stand by my contention.

>

>

>

> <Stop

>

> forthwith your this type of harmful anti-vedic assertions without adducing any

>

> evidence. If you have read Rig Veda, as you claim to have done, then you must

>

> have noticed that Rig Veda says that " Moon is the maker of the

>

> month " . The Lunar month is as old as the Rig Veda>.

>

>

>

> Yes, when the

>

> âmoon enters/joins/ lives with the sunâ it is known as Amavasyaâ as per the

>

> Vedas.  And as per the Vedanga Jyotisham also, a new lunar months starts

>

> with New Moon.  But where has it been said in the Rigveda or any other

>

> Veda or the Vedanga Jyotisha etc. that the lunar month Chaitra is Chaitra only

>

> because the Full Moon after fifteen days of  the start of that month will

>

> be in an imaginary equal twenty-seventh division known as Chitra of a still

>

> more imaginary circle called zodiac?  Unless and until you substantiate your

>

> arguments with proofs citing the original Vedic mantras with their

translations

>

> that Chaitra is Chaitra only because the Full Moon after fifteen days of the

>

> start of that month is in Chitra, your statement has absolutely no value.

>

>

>

> Then again, you

>

> have to tell the forum members as to what you mean by Chitra nakshtra, i.e.

>

> whether it is  supposed to be subsumed in a so called nirayana rashi or a

>

> so called sayana rashi?  If it is the latter, what ayanamsha should we

>

> choose and why?  What is the support of the Vedic mantras to justify your

>

> arguments?

>

>

>

> As already

>

> pointed out, even in eleventh century India,  twenty-seven equal nakshatra

>

> division  were being linked to sayana rashis.  So do you mean to say

>

> that in the Vedic period also they decided the nomenclature of lunar months by

>

> dint of linking Krittika etc. nakshatras, which you call sidereal, to sayana

>

> rashis?  Pl. clarify your stand in unambiguous terms.

>

>

>

> <You tried

>

> to justify celebration of Makar Sankranti on the shortest day by mentioning

the

>

> Makar Rekha and now you have miserably failed to show the mention of the

>

> " Makar Rekha' In any of the ancient texts>

>

>

>

> You have a very

>

> bad habit of ascribing such statements to others as were never made by

>

> them.  As clarified already, how can you expect to find Makar Rekha in any

>

> shastra if the term Makar Sankranti itself is an import via Surya Sidhanta

from

>

> a country other than India?  Makar Rekha is a âtatsamâ equivalent of

>

> âTropic of Capricornâ which you can find described in detail in Primary level

>

> geography books.

>

>

>

> < Nobody

>

> will read a single line of yours until you show where you found mention of the

>

> Makar rekha in the ancient shastras.>

>

>

>

> If wishes were

>

> horse beggars would ride them!

>

>

>

> Jai Shri Ram!

>

>

>

> A

>

> K Kaul

>

>

>

>  

>

>

>

>