Guest guest Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 Pranaam Sanjay, > Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not good as it is > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is not > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You have always > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so and when you You are normally fair, but being very unfair here. If you or somebody is using a verse of Varahamihira in a situation where it was not meant to be used and I question that, it does not amount to belitting Varahamihira. If Varahamihira left a detail ambiguous and I point it out, it is not belittling him. As a matter of fact, in a private mail to me, you yourself accepted that it was not clear if Varahamihira's verse was meant for use in Hora Shastra or not. I am essentially saying the same thing! So I respectfully urge you not to politicize or emotionalize the issue at hand! If you use apparent sunrise to reckon time, to note down birthtime ghatis, to time religious activities etc, I have no objection. If that time is used for astrological calculations, I will take an objection. > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government of India for > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great names of > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined all the > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to follow a > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are we to say > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we have a better > answer. Before turning this into an issue of whether they were fools or geniuses we should understand exactly what they said. Unfortunately, I have not read any publications of the Calendar Reform Committee and don't even know how to obtain them. But it seems like you have those documents. So can you please answer one fundamental question for me? Did they explicitly say this this was the sunrise definition to be used in astrological calculations such as Ghati Lagna? If yes, I have to respectfully disagree with them (without calling them " fools " ). If not, let us not use their names in the argument. Did the committee you mentioned arrive at unanimous conclusions? On the ayanamsa issue, for example, I know that Dr Raman continued to disagree even after the committe arrived at a conclusion. As I said, any definition based on visibility is un-workable. The exact time depends on weather conditions. Moreover, sunrise may not be visible at all on a day due to clouds or even an eclipse. So you have to come up with a *hypothetical* definiton to create a definition that results in a well-defined answer everyday. A hypothetical (human-created) definition is ok for calendar purposes, such as measuring ghatis everyday etc and keeping track of time. But I cannot accept the use of such parameters in the calculation of Ghati lagna etc. BTW, thank you for your clarification on ardha nadi in other mails. At one time, you strongly felt that everybody using a uniform division of rasi into 150 equal parts was wrong and that nadi was a summary of shodasa vargas. It was a brilliant idea and I still feel that it may be correct. But, you seem to be happy with uniform nadis now. Well, good luck in your researches. You can JHora 7.03 to check either kind of calculations. > they followed Jaimini (in a way) in equal space and time division. Yes, the key phrase is " in a way " . It is not at all *clear* that Jaimini meant equal space and time division to be used in vighati graha, let alone nadis. So, there is *some* basis for it in Jaimini's works, but it is not convincing enough. > I am sure each has its own use and both should > be correct as they come from the rishi's. Can you kindly quote a rishi saying that there are 150 equal nadis in each sign? Raghunath, click " Preferences " in menu, then " Related to calculations " in the sub-menu and then " Divisional Chart Calculation Options " . Ardha nadi calculation option is at the bottom. Uniform/non-uniform nadi option is two combo boxes above it. May Jupiter's light shine on us, Narasimha ------------------------------- Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- > |om namo bhagavate vasudevaya| > Dear Narasimha > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government of India for > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great names of > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined all the > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to follow a > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are we to say > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we have a better > answer. > Have you read the arguments of the savants? Which definition of sunrise did > Dr Raman follow? Have yo got a copy of the reference book for sunrise and > sunset times calculation published by Lahiri publications? If so then we > don't really need a telescope to check for clouds and trees. The book has > given the standard method that was accepted by the committee. > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have to read and > give a parawise argument against it to affirm your point to the government > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your statements > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how the world > works. Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not good as it is > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is not > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You have always > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so and when you > have the time, start compiling a volume that will have your arguments for > the sunrise time you propose. > You are well aware of my views and to what extent I agree or otherwise, but > you will NEVER EVER hear a word against the decision of the committee of > elders (Lahiri committee) from me. I shall follow the ayanamsa and sunrise > definition. If ever I feel that I am in disagreement, then like a true > scholar of Jyotisa I will prepare a paper for my arguments. > That you for giving the explanation of the three times of sunrise as I see > that many did not understand these basic issues. Perhaps we shall understand > the import of Varahamihira if we contemplate on the importance of sunlight > for all life on earth. If it is this light that is giving light then the > first ray should define sunrise or the begining of life... > With best wishes and warm regards, > Sanjay Rath > * * * > Sri Jagannath Center® > 15B Gangaram Hospital Road > New Delhi 110060, India > http://srath.com <http://srath.com/> , +91-11-25717162 > * * * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 Pranaam Sanjay, One point in addition to what I wrote earlier this morning. > > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have to > read and > > give a parawise argument against it to affirm your point to the > government > > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your > statements > > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how > the world > > works. I did some searches on the internet during lunch and found some material on a Government of India website on this. Apparently, the purpose of the publication of sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset tables by Positional Astronomy Centre is merely for civil, military and religious reasons. For example, Indian army and air force need the sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset times. Indian government and various state governments need the sunrise times for civil/religious purposes such as declaring festivals. How can the work of a committee that addressed such mundane needs be binding on us in astrological calculations such as Hora Lagna and Ghati Lagna??? I can understand if visibility is used for civil and military purposes. Even if the definition has some arbitrariness to it and the time given is only an approximate expected time, it is good enough for civil/military purposes if it close enough. On the other hand, if a definition based on the true rise of Sun's center is used (which has no arbitrariness and is an exactly definable and computable event), it is meaningless for civil and military purposes. It is meaningful only from the astrological angle. Thus, it seems to me like the committee in question balanced various mundane needs to come up with their conclusions. Astrological calculations such as Ghati lagna may have been the least of their concerns when they fixed the sunrise definition. Given that, I see no reason to force those views on astrologers who have a specific purpose. May Jupiter's light shine on us, Narasimha ------------------------------- Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- jyotisa , " pvr108 " <pvr@c...> wrote: > Pranaam Sanjay, > > > Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not good as it > is > > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is not > > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You > have always > > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so > and when you > > You are normally fair, but being very unfair here. If you or > somebody is using a verse of Varahamihira in a situation where it > was not meant to be used and I question that, it does not amount to > belitting Varahamihira. If Varahamihira left a detail ambiguous and > I point it out, it is not belittling him. > > As a matter of fact, in a private mail to me, you yourself accepted > that it was not clear if Varahamihira's verse was meant for use in > Hora Shastra or not. I am essentially saying the same thing! > > So I respectfully urge you not to politicize or emotionalize the > issue at hand! > > If you use apparent sunrise to reckon time, to note down birthtime > ghatis, to time religious activities etc, I have no objection. If > that time is used for astrological calculations, I will take an > objection. > > > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government of > India for > > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great > names of > > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined > all the > > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to follow > a > > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are we > to say > > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we > have a better > > answer. > > Before turning this into an issue of whether they were fools or > geniuses we should understand exactly what they said. > > Unfortunately, I have not read any publications of the Calendar > Reform Committee and don't even know how to obtain them. But it > seems like you have those documents. So can you please answer one > fundamental question for me? > > Did they explicitly say this this was the sunrise definition to be > used in astrological calculations such as Ghati Lagna? > > If yes, I have to respectfully disagree with them (without calling > them " fools " ). If not, let us not use their names in the argument. > > Did the committee you mentioned arrive at unanimous conclusions? On > the ayanamsa issue, for example, I know that Dr Raman continued to > disagree even after the committe arrived at a conclusion. > > As I said, any definition based on visibility is un-workable. The > exact time depends on weather conditions. Moreover, sunrise may not > be visible at all on a day due to clouds or even an eclipse. So you > have to come up with a *hypothetical* definiton to create a > definition that results in a well-defined answer everyday. A > hypothetical (human-created) definition is ok for calendar purposes, > such as measuring ghatis everyday etc and keeping track of time. But > I cannot accept the use of such parameters in the calculation of > Ghati lagna etc. > > BTW, thank you for your clarification on ardha nadi in other mails. > At one time, you strongly felt that everybody using a uniform > division of rasi into 150 equal parts was wrong and that nadi was a > summary of shodasa vargas. It was a brilliant idea and I still feel > that it may be correct. But, you seem to be happy with uniform nadis > now. Well, good luck in your researches. You can JHora 7.03 to check > either kind of calculations. > > > they followed Jaimini (in a way) in equal space and time division. > > Yes, the key phrase is " in a way " . It is not at all *clear* that > Jaimini meant equal space and time division to be used in vighati > graha, let alone nadis. So, there is *some* basis for it in > Jaimini's works, but it is not convincing enough. > > > I am sure each has its own use and both should > > be correct as they come from the rishi's. > > Can you kindly quote a rishi saying that there are 150 equal nadis > in each sign? > > Raghunath, click " Preferences " in menu, then " Related to > calculations " in the sub-menu and then " Divisional Chart Calculation > Options " . Ardha nadi calculation option is at the bottom. > Uniform/non-uniform nadi option is two combo boxes above it. > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > Narasimha > > ------------------------------- > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > ------------------------------- > > > |om namo bhagavate vasudevaya| > > Dear Narasimha > > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government of > India for > > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great > names of > > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined > all the > > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to follow > a > > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are we > to say > > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we > have a better > > answer. > > Have you read the arguments of the savants? Which definition of > sunrise did > > Dr Raman follow? Have yo got a copy of the reference book for > sunrise and > > sunset times calculation published by Lahiri publications? If so > then we > > don't really need a telescope to check for clouds and trees. The > book has > > given the standard method that was accepted by the committee. > > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have to > read and > > give a parawise argument against it to affirm your point to the > government > > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your > statements > > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how > the world > > works. Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not > good as it is > > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is not > > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You > have always > > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so > and when you > > have the time, start compiling a volume that will have your > arguments for > > the sunrise time you propose. > > You are well aware of my views and to what extent I agree or > otherwise, but > > you will NEVER EVER hear a word against the decision of the > committee of > > elders (Lahiri committee) from me. I shall follow the ayanamsa and > sunrise > > definition. If ever I feel that I am in disagreement, then like a > true > > scholar of Jyotisa I will prepare a paper for my arguments. > > That you for giving the explanation of the three times of sunrise > as I see > > that many did not understand these basic issues. Perhaps we shall > understand > > the import of Varahamihira if we contemplate on the importance of > sunlight > > for all life on earth. If it is this light that is giving light > then the > > first ray should define sunrise or the begining of life... > > With best wishes and warm regards, > > Sanjay Rath > > * * * > > Sri Jagannath Center® > > 15B Gangaram Hospital Road > > New Delhi 110060, India > > http://srath.com <http://srath.com/> , +91-11-25717162 > > * * * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 JAI SRIRAM Dear Pt.Sanjay,Shri Narashima and other members, As far as the jyotish knowledge is concerned i am like a small kid before Pandit and Shri Rao.But still as a group member i like to express some of my views.Regarding sunrise definition my humble option is that just leave what the committe is said,who are all the members,Dr Raman was not happy about the committe decision,for what purpose Indian govt setup those committies,what the other govt is saying etc BTW by the satement given by Pt.Sanjay according Sage Varahamihira sunrise should be from apparent rise.We don't expect from Varahamihira to indicate this type of sunrise for only this purpose(casting horospose) and this for special asc etc.It is better to stick what Varahamihira said about sunrise for all type of calculations in jyotish until if there is any other defintion is avilable from any other classics or even from Varahamihira's notes. Thanks, S.Venkatesh jyotisa , " pvr108 " <pvr@c...> wrote: > Pranaam Sanjay, > > One point in addition to what I wrote earlier this morning. > > > > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have > to > > read and > > > give a parawise argument ainst it to affirm your point to the > > government > > > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your > > statement > > > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how > > the world > > > works. > > I did some searches on the internet during lunch and found some > material on a Government of India website on this. Apparently, the > purpose of the publication of sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset > tables by Positional Astronomy Centre is merely for civil, military > and religious reasons. For example, Indian army and air force need > the sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset times. Indian government > and various state governments need the sunrise times for > civil/religious purposes such as declaring festivals. > > How can the work of a committee that addressed such mundane needs be > binding on us in astrological calculations such as Hora Lagna and > Ghati Lagna??? > > I can understand if visibility is used for civil and military > purposes. Even if the definition has some arbitrariness to it and > the time given is only an approximate expected time, it is good > enough for civil/military purposes if it close enough. On the other > hand, if a definition based on the true rise of Sun's center is used > (which has no arbitrariness and is an exactly definable and > computable event), it is meaningless for civil and military > purposes. It is meaningful only from the astrological angle. > > Thus, it seems to me like the committee in question balanced various > mundane needs to come up with their conclusions. Astrological > calculations such as Ghati lagna may have been the least of their > concerns when they fixed the sunrise definition. > > Given that, I see no reason to force those views on astrologers who > have a specific purpose. > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > Narasimha > ------------------------------- > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > ------------------------------- > > jyotisa , " pvr108 " <pvr@c...> wrote: > > Pranaam Sanjay, > > > > > Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not good as > it > > is > > > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is > not > > > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You > > have always > > > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so > > and when you > > > > You are normally fair, but being very unfair here. If you or > > somebody is using a verse of Varahamihira in a situation where it > > was not meant to be used and I question that, it does not amount > to > > belitting Varahamihira. If Varahamihira left a detail ambiguous > and > > I point it out, it is not belittling him. > > > > As a matter of fact, in a private mail to me, you yourself > accepted > > that it was not clear if Varahamihira's verse was meant for use in > > Hora Shastra or not. I am essentially saying the same thing! > > > > So I respectfully urge you not to politicize or emotionalize the > > issue at hand! > > > > If you use apparent sunrise to reckon time, to note down birthtime > > ghatis, to time religious activities etc, I have no objection. If > > that time is used for astrological calculations, I will take an > > objection. > > > > > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government > of > > India for > > > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great > > names of > > > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined > > all the > > > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to > follow > > a > > > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are > we > > to say > > > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we > > have a better > > > answer. > > > > Before turning this into an issue of whether they were fools or > > geniuses we should understand exactly what they said. > > > > Unfortunately, I have not read any publications of the Calendar > > Reform Committee and don't even know how to obtain them. But it > > seems like you have those documents. So can you please answer one > > fundamental question for me? > > > > Did they explicitly say this this was the sunrise definition to be > > used in astrological calculations such as Ghati Lagna? > > > > If yes, I have to respectfully disagree with them (without calling > > them " fools " ). If not, let us not use their names in the argument. > > > > Did the committee you mentioned arrive at unanimous conclusions? > On > > the ayanamsa issue, for example, I know that Dr Raman continued to > > disagree even after the committe arrived at a conclusion. > > > > As I said, any definition based on visibility is un-workable. The > > exact time depends on weather conditions. Moreover, sunrise may > not > > be visible at all on a day due to clouds or even an eclipse. So > you > > have to come up with a *hypothetical* definiton to create a > > definition that results in a well-defined answer everyday. A > > hypothetical (human-created) definition is ok for calendar > purposes, > > such as measuring ghatis everyday etc and keeping track of time. > But > > I cannot accept the use of such parameters in the calculation of > > Ghati lagna etc. > > > > BTW, thank you for your clarification on ardha nadi in other > mails. > > At one time, you strongly felt that everybody using a uniform > > division of rasi into 150 equal parts was wrong and that nadi was > a > > summary of shodasa vargas. It was a brilliant idea and I still > feel > > that it may be correct. But, you seem to be happy with uniform > nadis > > now. Well, good luck in your researches. You can JHora 7.03 to > check > > either kind of calculations. > > > > > they followed Jaimini (in a way) in equal space and time > division. > > > > Yes, the key phrase is " in a way " . It is not at all *clear* that > > Jaimini meant equal space and time division to be used in vighati > > graha, let alone nadis. So, there is *some* basis for it in > > Jaimini's works, but it is not convincing enough. > > > > > I am sure each has its own use and both should > > > be correct as they come from the rishi's. > > > > Can you kindly quote a rishi saying that there are 150 equal nadis > > in each sign? > > > > Raghunath, click " Preferences " in menu, then " Related to > > calculations " in the sub-menu and then " Divisional Chart > Calculation > > Options " . Ardha nadi calculation option is at the bottom. > > Uniform/non-uniform nadi option is two combo boxes above it. > > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > > Narasimha > > > > ------------------------------- > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > > ------------------------------- > > > > > |om namo bhagavate vasudevaya| > > > Dear Narasimha > > > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government > of > > India for > > > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great > > names of > > > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined > > all the > > > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to > follow > > a > > > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are > we > > to say > > > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we > > have a better > > > answer. > > > Have you read the arguments of the savants? Which definition of > > sunrise did > > > Dr Raman follow? Have yo got a copy of the reference book for > > sunrise and > > > sunset times calculation published by Lahiri publications? If so > > then we > > > don't really need a telescope to check for clouds and trees. The > > book has > > > given the standard method that was accepted by the committee. > > > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have > to > > read and > > > give a parawise argument against it to affirm your point to the > > government > > > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your > > statements > > > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how > > the world > > > works. Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not > > good as it is > > > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is > not > > > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You > > have always > > > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so > > and when you > > > have the time, start compiling a volume that will have your > > arguments for > > > the sunrise time you propose. > > > You are well aware of my views and to what extent I agree or > > otherwise, but > > > you will NEVER EVER hear a word against the decision of the > > committee of > > > elders (Lahiri committee) from me. I shall follow the ayanamsa > and > > sunrise > > > definition. If ever I feel that I am in disagreement, then like > a > > true > > > scholar of Jyotisa I will prepare a paper for my arguments. > > > That you for giving the explanation of the three times of > sunrise > > as I see > > > that many did not understand these basic issues. Perhaps we > shall > > understand > > > the import of Varahamihira if we contemplate on the importance > of > > > > sunlight > > > for all life on earth. If it is this light that is giving light > > then the > > > first ray should define sunrise or the begining of life... > > > With best wishes and warm regards, > > > Sanjay Rath > > > * * * > > > Sri Jagannath Center® > > > 15B Gangaram Hospital Road > > > New Delhi 110060, India > > > http://srath.com <http://srath.com/> , +91-11-25717162 > > > * * * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 Dear Venkatesh, > BTW by the satement given by Pt.Sanjay > according Sage Varahamihira sunrise should be from apparent rise.We > don't expect from Varahamihira to indicate this type of sunrise for > only this purpose(casting horospose) and this for special asc etc.It > is better to stick what > > Varahamihira said about sunrise for all type of calculations in > jyotish until if there is any other defintion is avilable from any > other classics or even from Varahamihira's notes. I was not expecting Varahamihira to define a sunrise type for each calculation. My point is that it is not even clear if Varahamihira's statement about Sunrise was related to predictive astrology at all. In fact, as I said, Sanjay ji also agreed in a private mail that it was not clear if Varahamihira's statement was in the context of Hora Shastra or not. Irrespective of which sunrise you use, Bhava Lagna, Hora Lagna and Ghati Lagna will all conjoin Sun exactly at the time of the sunrise (that is how they are defined). Lagna too will be closeby. But, if you don't use the true rise of center, then lagna will be a little off from the rest. While all those lagnas are having a big party with Sun, do you want to leave the actual lagna out of the party or include that also by using the true rise of center? :-) Seriously, it makes a lot of structural sense to have lagna also join Sun along with all the special lagnas at the time of sunrise. I am 100% confident that Sanjay ji and the rest will eventually come around and accept my view in this matter. It is just a matter of time... May Jupiter's light shine on us, Narasimha ------------------------------- Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- jyotisa , " ksvssvk " <ksvssvk> wrote: > JAI SRIRAM > Dear Pt.Sanjay,Shri Narashima and other members, > > As far as the jyotish knowledge is concerned > i am like a small kid before Pandit and Shri Rao.But still as a group > member i like to express some of my views.Regarding sunrise > definition my humble option is that just leave what the committe is > said,who are all the members,Dr Raman was not happy about the committe > decision,for what purpose Indian govt setup those committies,what the > other govt is saying etc > BTW by the satement given by Pt.Sanjay > according Sage Varahamihira sunrise should be from apparent rise.We > don't expect from Varahamihira to indicate this type of sunrise for > only this purpose(casting horospose) and this for special asc etc.It > is better to stick what > > Varahamihira said about sunrise for all type of calculations in > jyotish until if there is any other defintion is avilable from any > other classics or even from Varahamihira's notes. > > Thanks, > S.Venkatesh > jyotisa , " pvr108 " <pvr@c...> wrote: > > Pranaam Sanjay, > > > > One point in addition to what I wrote earlier this morning. > > > > > > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have > > to > > > read and > > > > give a parawise argument ainst it to affirm your point to the > > > government > > > > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your > > > statement > > > > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how > > > the world > > > > works. > > > > I did some searches on the internet during lunch and found some > > material on a Government of India website on this. Apparently, the > > purpose of the publication of sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset > > tables by Positional Astronomy Centre is merely for civil, military > > and religious reasons. For example, Indian army and air force need > > the sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset times. Indian government > > and various state governments need the sunrise times for > > civil/religious purposes such as declaring festivals. > > > > How can the work of a committee that addressed such mundane needs be > > binding on us in astrological calculations such as Hora Lagna and > > Ghati Lagna??? > > > > I can understand if visibility is used for civil and military > > purposes. Even if the definition has some arbitrariness to it and > > the time given is only an approximate expected time, it is good > > enough for civil/military purposes if it close enough. On the other > > hand, if a definition based on the true rise of Sun's center is used > > (which has no arbitrariness and is an exactly definable and > > computable event), it is meaningless for civil and military > > purposes. It is meaningful only from the astrological angle. > > > > Thus, it seems to me like the committee in question balanced various > > mundane needs to come up with their conclusions. Astrological > > calculations such as Ghati lagna may have been the least of their > > concerns when they fixed the sunrise definition. > > > > Given that, I see no reason to force those views on astrologers who > > have a specific purpose. > > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > > Narasimha > > ------------------------------- > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > > ------------------------------- > > > > jyotisa , " pvr108 " <pvr@c...> wrote: > > > Pranaam Sanjay, > > > > > > > Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not good as > > it > > > is > > > > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is > > not > > > > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You > > > have always > > > > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so > > > and when you > > > > > > You are normally fair, but being very unfair here. If you or > > > somebody is using a verse of Varahamihira in a situation where it > > > was not meant to be used and I question that, it does not amount > > to > > > belitting Varahamihira. If Varahamihira left a detail ambiguous > > and > > > I point it out, it is not belittling him. > > > > > > As a matter of fact, in a private mail to me, you yourself > > accepted > > > that it was not clear if Varahamihira's verse was meant for use in > > > Hora Shastra or not. I am essentially saying the same thing! > > > > > > So I respectfully urge you not to politicize or emotionalize the > > > issue at hand! > > > > > > If you use apparent sunrise to reckon time, to note down birthtime > > > ghatis, to time religious activities etc, I have no objection. If > > > that time is used for astrological calculations, I will take an > > > objection. > > > > > > > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government > > of > > > India for > > > > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great > > > names of > > > > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined > > > all the > > > > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to > > follow > > > a > > > > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are > > we > > > to say > > > > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we > > > have a better > > > > answer. > > > > > > Before turning this into an issue of whether they were fools or > > > geniuses we should understand exactly what they said. > > > > > > Unfortunately, I have not read any publications of the Calendar > > > Reform Committee and don't even know how to obtain them. But it > > > seems like you have those documents. So can you please answer one > > > fundamental question for me? > > > > > > Did they explicitly say this this was the sunrise definition to be > > > used in astrological calculations such as Ghati Lagna? > > > > > > If yes, I have to respectfully disagree with them (without calling > > > them " fools " ). If not, let us not use their names in the argument. > > > > > > Did the committee you mentioned arrive at unanimous conclusions? > > On > > > the ayanamsa issue, for example, I know that Dr Raman continued to > > > disagree even after the committe arrived at a conclusion. > > > > > > As I said, any definition based on visibility is un-workable. The > > > exact time depends on weather conditions. Moreover, sunrise may > > not > > > be visible at all on a day due to clouds or even an eclipse. So > > you > > > have to come up with a *hypothetical* definiton to create a > > > definition that results in a well-defined answer everyday. A > > > hypothetical (human-created) definition is ok for calendar > > purposes, > > > such as measuring ghatis everyday etc and keeping track of time. > > But > > > I cannot accept the use of such parameters in the calculation of > > > Ghati lagna etc. > > > > > > BTW, thank you for your clarification on ardha nadi in other > > mails. > > > At one time, you strongly felt that everybody using a uniform > > > division of rasi into 150 equal parts was wrong and that nadi was > > a > > > summary of shodasa vargas. It was a brilliant idea and I still > > feel > > > that it may be correct. But, you seem to be happy with uniform > > nadis > > > now. Well, good luck in your researches. You can JHora 7.03 to > > check > > > either kind of calculations. > > > > > > > they followed Jaimini (in a way) in equal space and time > > division. > > > > > > Yes, the key phrase is " in a way " . It is not at all *clear* that > > > Jaimini meant equal space and time division to be used in vighati > > > graha, let alone nadis. So, there is *some* basis for it in > > > Jaimini's works, but it is not convincing enough. > > > > > > > I am sure each has its own use and both should > > > > be correct as they come from the rishi's. > > > > > > Can you kindly quote a rishi saying that there are 150 equal nadis > > > in each sign? > > > > > > Raghunath, click " Preferences " in menu, then " Related to > > > calculations " in the sub-menu and then " Divisional Chart > > Calculation > > > Options " . Ardha nadi calculation option is at the bottom. > > > Uniform/non-uniform nadi option is two combo boxes above it. > > > > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > > > Narasimha > > > > > > ------------------------------ - > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > > > ------------------------------ - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 19, 2005 Report Share Posted July 19, 2005 |om namo bhagavate vasudevaya| Dear Narasimha comments below With best wishes and warm regards, Sanjay Rath * * * Sri Jagannath Center® 15B Gangaram Hospital Road New Delhi 110060, India http://srath.com, +91-11-25717162 * * * jyotisa [jyotisa ] On Behalf Of pvr108Monday, July 18, 2005 9:18 PMjyotisa Subject: Re: Sunrise and also ardha nadis Dear Venkatesh,> BTW by the satement given by Pt.Sanjay> according Sage Varahamihira sunrise should be from apparent rise.We> don't expect from Varahamihira to indicate this type of sunrise for > only this purpose(casting horospose) and this for special asc etc.It> is better to stick what > > Varahamihira said about sunrise for all type of calculations in> jyotish until if there is any other defintion is avilable from any> other classics or even from Varahamihira's notes. I was not expecting Varahamihira to define a sunrise type for each calculation. My point is that it is not even clear if Varahamihira's statement about Sunrise was related to predictive astrology at all. In fact, as I said, Sanjay ji also agreed in a private mail that it was not clear if Varahamihira's statement was in the context of Hora Shastra or not.[sanjay Rath] Thats fine but Brihat Samhita is a part of Jyotisa Sastra so the definition is definitely a part of Jyotisa sastra. Irrespective of which sunrise you use, Bhava Lagna, Hora Lagna and Ghati Lagna will all conjoin Sun exactly at the time of the sunrise (that is how they are defined). Lagna too will be closeby. But, if you don't use the true rise of center, then lagna will be a little off from the rest.[sanjay Rath] Does not matter really as the Hora Lagna, Ghatika Lagna etc are based on the circular motion or Bhava Lagna while Lagna is based on the elliptical path. While all those lagnas are having a big party with Sun, do you want to leave the actual lagna out of the party or include that also by using the true rise of center? :-)[sanjay Rath] Yes we should leave the actual lagna out as this is satya and this has to be different from Bhava Lagna and other *circular* lagna which are based on the way the intelligence works treating that the world is round, while in reality it is not round. Seriously, it makes a lot of structural sense to have lagna also join Sun along with all the special lagnas at the time of sunrise.[sanjay Rath] It makes more structural sense to have the lagna out of the lot of Bhava Lagna, Ghatika Lagna and Hora Lagna...In fact Bhava Lagna should be different from Lagna and not the same as Lagna as you are trying to make with your arguments. I am 100% confident that Sanjay ji and the rest will eventually come around and accept my view in this matter. It is just a matter of time...[sanjay Rath] Never be too sure Narasimha...our views are based on the sound advise of many elders and it is not easy for me to change without very solid arguments. May Jupiter's light shine on us,[sanjay Rath] Brihaspate Abhisastiramunca... Narasimha-------------------------------Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.netFree Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.orgSri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org- In jyotisa , "ksvssvk" <ksvssvk> wrote:> JAI SRIRAM> Dear Pt.Sanjay,Shri Narashima and other members,> > As far as the jyotish knowledge is concerned> i am like a small kid before Pandit and Shri Rao.But still as a group> member i like to express some of my views.Regarding sunrise > definition my humble option is that just leave what the committe is> said,who are all the members,Dr Raman was not happy about the committe> decision,for what purpose Indian govt setup those committies,what the> other govt is saying etc> BTW by the satement given by Pt.Sanjay> according Sage Varahamihira sunrise should be from apparent rise.We> don't expect from Varahamihira to indicate this type of sunrise for > only this purpose(casting horospose) and this for special asc etc.It> is better to stick what > > Varahamihira said about sunrise for all type of calculations in> jyotish until if there is any other defintion is avilable from any> other classics or even from Varahamihira's notes. > > Thanks,> S.Venkatesh> jyotisa , "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:> > Pranaam Sanjay,> > > > One point in addition to what I wrote earlier this morning.> > > > > > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have > > to > > > read and> > > > give a parawise argument ainst it to affirm your point to the > > > government> > > > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your > > > statement> > > > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how > > > the world> > > > works.> > > > I did some searches on the internet during lunch and found some > > material on a Government of India website on this. Apparently, the > > purpose of the publication of sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset > > tables by Positional Astronomy Centre is merely for civil, military > > and religious reasons. For example, Indian army and air force need > > the sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset times. Indian government > > and various state governments need the sunrise times for > > civil/religious purposes such as declaring festivals.> > > > How can the work of a committee that addressed such mundane needs be > > binding on us in astrological calculations such as Hora Lagna and > > Ghati Lagna???> > > > I can understand if visibility is used for civil and military > > purposes. Even if the definition has some arbitrariness to it and > > the time given is only an approximate expected time, it is good > > enough for civil/military purposes if it close enough. On the other > > hand, if a definition based on the true rise of Sun's center is used > > (which has no arbitrariness and is an exactly definable and > > computable event), it is meaningless for civil and military > > purposes. It is meaningful only from the astrological angle.> > > > Thus, it seems to me like the committee in question balanced various > > mundane needs to come up with their conclusions. Astrological > > calculations such as Ghati lagna may have been the least of their > > concerns when they fixed the sunrise definition.> > > > Given that, I see no reason to force those views on astrologers who > > have a specific purpose.> > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,> > Narasimha> > -------------------------------> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> > -------------------------------> > > > jyotisa , "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:> > > Pranaam Sanjay,> > > > > > > Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not good as > > it > > > is> > > > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is > > not> > > > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You > > > have always> > > > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so > > > and when you> > > > > > You are normally fair, but being very unfair here. If you or > > > somebody is using a verse of Varahamihira in a situation where it > > > was not meant to be used and I question that, it does not amount > > to > > > belitting Varahamihira. If Varahamihira left a detail ambiguous > > and > > > I point it out, it is not belittling him.> > > > > > As a matter of fact, in a private mail to me, you yourself > > accepted > > > that it was not clear if Varahamihira's verse was meant for use in > > > Hora Shastra or not. I am essentially saying the same thing!> > > > > > So I respectfully urge you not to politicize or emotionalize the > > > issue at hand!> > > > > > If you use apparent sunrise to reckon time, to note down birthtime > > > ghatis, to time religious activities etc, I have no objection. If > > > that time is used for astrological calculations, I will take an > > > objection.> > > > > > > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government > > of > > > India for> > > > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great > > > names of> > > > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined > > > all the> > > > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to > > follow > > > a> > > > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are > > we > > > to say> > > > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we > > > have a better> > > > answer. > > > > > > Before turning this into an issue of whether they were fools or > > > geniuses we should understand exactly what they said.> > > > > > Unfortunately, I have not read any publications of the Calendar > > > Reform Committee and don't even know how to obtain them. But it > > > seems like you have those documents. So can you please answer one > > > fundamental question for me?> > > > > > Did they explicitly say this this was the sunrise definition to be > > > used in astrological calculations such as Ghati Lagna?> > > > > > If yes, I have to respectfully disagree with them (without calling > > > them "fools"). If not, let us not use their names in the argument.> > > > > > Did the committee you mentioned arrive at unanimous conclusions? > > On > > > the ayanamsa issue, for example, I know that Dr Raman continued to > > > disagree even after the committe arrived at a conclusion.> > > > > > As I said, any definition based on visibility is un-workable. The > > > exact time depends on weather conditions. Moreover, sunrise may > > not > > > be visible at all on a day due to clouds or even an eclipse. So > > you > > > have to come up with a *hypothetical* definiton to create a > > > definition that results in a well-defined answer everyday. A > > > hypothetical (human-created) definition is ok for calendar > > purposes, > > > such as measuring ghatis everyday etc and keeping track of time. > > But > > > I cannot accept the use of such parameters in the calculation of > > > Ghati lagna etc.> > > > > > BTW, thank you for your clarification on ardha nadi in other > > mails. > > > At one time, you strongly felt that everybody using a uniform > > > division of rasi into 150 equal parts was wrong and that nadi was > > a > > > summary of shodasa vargas. It was a brilliant idea and I still > > feel > > > that it may be correct. But, you seem to be happy with uniform > > nadis > > > now. Well, good luck in your researches. You can JHora 7.03 to > > check > > > either kind of calculations.> > > > > > > they followed Jaimini (in a way) in equal space and time > > division.> > > > > > Yes, the key phrase is "in a way". It is not at all *clear* that > > > Jaimini meant equal space and time division to be used in vighati > > > graha, let alone nadis. So, there is *some* basis for it in > > > Jaimini's works, but it is not convincing enough.> > > > > > > I am sure each has its own use and both should> > > > be correct as they come from the rishi's.> > > > > > Can you kindly quote a rishi saying that there are 150 equal nadis > > > in each sign?> > > > > > Raghunath, click "Preferences" in menu, then "Related to > > > calculations" in the sub-menu and then "Divisional Chart > > Calculation > > > Options". Ardha nadi calculation option is at the bottom. > > > Uniform/non-uniform nadi option is two combo boxes above it.> > > > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > > > Narasimha> > > > > > -------------------------------> > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> > > ------------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2005 Report Share Posted July 20, 2005 JAI GURUDEV Pranam Guruji. Please accept by respectful Ananta Namanas on this auspicious eve of Gurupurnima. Yours namra shishya, Mohan Hegde. - Guru Sanjay Rath jyotisa Tuesday, July 19, 2005 10:15 PM RE: Re: Sunrise and also ardha nadis |om namo bhagavate vasudevaya| Dear Narasimha comments below With best wishes and warm regards, Sanjay Rath * * * Sri Jagannath Center® 15B Gangaram Hospital Road New Delhi 110060, India http://srath.com, +91-11-25717162 * * * jyotisa [jyotisa ] On Behalf Of pvr108Monday, July 18, 2005 9:18 PMjyotisa Subject: Re: Sunrise and also ardha nadis Dear Venkatesh,> BTW by the satement given by Pt.Sanjay> according Sage Varahamihira sunrise should be from apparent rise.We> don't expect from Varahamihira to indicate this type of sunrise for > only this purpose(casting horospose) and this for special asc etc.It> is better to stick what > > Varahamihira said about sunrise for all type of calculations in> jyotish until if there is any other defintion is avilable from any> other classics or even from Varahamihira's notes. I was not expecting Varahamihira to define a sunrise type for each calculation. My point is that it is not even clear if Varahamihira's statement about Sunrise was related to predictive astrology at all. In fact, as I said, Sanjay ji also agreed in a private mail that it was not clear if Varahamihira's statement was in the context of Hora Shastra or not.[sanjay Rath] Thats fine but Brihat Samhita is a part of Jyotisa Sastra so the definition is definitely a part of Jyotisa sastra. Irrespective of which sunrise you use, Bhava Lagna, Hora Lagna and Ghati Lagna will all conjoin Sun exactly at the time of the sunrise (that is how they are defined). Lagna too will be closeby. But, if you don't use the true rise of center, then lagna will be a little off from the rest.[sanjay Rath] Does not matter really as the Hora Lagna, Ghatika Lagna etc are based on the circular motion or Bhava Lagna while Lagna is based on the elliptical path. While all those lagnas are having a big party with Sun, do you want to leave the actual lagna out of the party or include that also by using the true rise of center? :-)[sanjay Rath] Yes we should leave the actual lagna out as this is satya and this has to be different from Bhava Lagna and other *circular* lagna which are based on the way the intelligence works treating that the world is round, while in reality it is not round. Seriously, it makes a lot of structural sense to have lagna also join Sun along with all the special lagnas at the time of sunrise.[sanjay Rath] It makes more structural sense to have the lagna out of the lot of Bhava Lagna, Ghatika Lagna and Hora Lagna...In fact Bhava Lagna should be different from Lagna and not the same as Lagna as you are trying to make with your arguments. I am 100% confident that Sanjay ji and the rest will eventually come around and accept my view in this matter. It is just a matter of time...[sanjay Rath] Never be too sure Narasimha...our views are based on the sound advise of many elders and it is not easy for me to change without very solid arguments. May Jupiter's light shine on us,[sanjay Rath] Brihaspate Abhisastiramunca... Narasimha-------------------------------Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.netFree Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.orgSri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org- In jyotisa , "ksvssvk" <ksvssvk> wrote:> JAI SRIRAM> Dear Pt.Sanjay,Shri Narashima and other members,> > As far as the jyotish knowledge is concerned> i am like a small kid before Pandit and Shri Rao.But still as a group> member i like to express some of my views.Regarding sunrise > definition my humble option is that just leave what the committe is> said,who are all the members,Dr Raman was not happy about the committe> decision,for what purpose Indian govt setup those committies,what the> other govt is saying etc> BTW by the satement given by Pt.Sanjay> according Sage Varahamihira sunrise should be from apparent rise.We> don't expect from Varahamihira to indicate this type of sunrise for > only this purpose(casting horospose) and this for special asc etc.It> is better to stick what > > Varahamihira said about sunrise for all type of calculations in> jyotish until if there is any other defintion is avilable from any> other classics or even from Varahamihira's notes. > > Thanks,> S.Venkatesh> jyotisa , "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:> > Pranaam Sanjay,> > > > One point in addition to what I wrote earlier this morning.> > > > > > If you don't like the arguments of the committee, then you have > > to > > > read and> > > > give a parawise argument ainst it to affirm your point to the > > > government> > > > of India. If the Ministry feels that you have some merit in your > > > statement> > > > then they will give you a hearing and offer a review. Thats how > > > the world> > > > works.> > > > I did some searches on the internet during lunch and found some > > material on a Government of India website on this. Apparently, the > > purpose of the publication of sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset > > tables by Positional Astronomy Centre is merely for civil, military > > and religious reasons. For example, Indian army and air force need > > the sunrise, sunset, moonrise and moonset times. Indian government > > and various state governments need the sunrise times for > > civil/religious purposes such as declaring festivals.> > > > How can the work of a committee that addressed such mundane needs be > > binding on us in astrological calculations such as Hora Lagna and > > Ghati Lagna???> > > > I can understand if visibility is used for civil and military > > purposes. Even if the definition has some arbitrariness to it and > > the time given is only an approximate expected time, it is good > > enough for civil/military purposes if it close enough. On the other > > hand, if a definition based on the true rise of Sun's center is used > > (which has no arbitrariness and is an exactly definable and > > computable event), it is meaningless for civil and military > > purposes. It is meaningful only from the astrological angle.> > > > Thus, it seems to me like the committee in question balanced various > > mundane needs to come up with their conclusions. Astrological > > calculations such as Ghati lagna may have been the least of their > > concerns when they fixed the sunrise definition.> > > > Given that, I see no reason to force those views on astrologers who > > have a specific purpose.> > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,> > Narasimha> > -------------------------------> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> > -------------------------------> > > > jyotisa , "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:> > > Pranaam Sanjay,> > > > > > > Statements like ambiguous verse by Varahamihira are not good as > > it > > > is> > > > not good to belittle the seers and the elders. Varahamihira is > > not> > > > considered an incarnation of Surya the Sun God for nothing. You > > > have always> > > > been a great believer of the seers, so please continue to be so > > > and when you> > > > > > You are normally fair, but being very unfair here. If you or > > > somebody is using a verse of Varahamihira in a situation where it > > > was not meant to be used and I question that, it does not amount > > to > > > belitting Varahamihira. If Varahamihira left a detail ambiguous > > and > > > I point it out, it is not belittling him.> > > > > > As a matter of fact, in a private mail to me, you yourself > > accepted > > > that it was not clear if Varahamihira's verse was meant for use in > > > Hora Shastra or not. I am essentially saying the same thing!> > > > > > So I respectfully urge you not to politicize or emotionalize the > > > issue at hand!> > > > > > If you use apparent sunrise to reckon time, to note down birthtime > > > ghatis, to time religious activities etc, I have no objection. If > > > that time is used for astrological calculations, I will take an > > > objection.> > > > > > > There was a calendar reforms committee set up by the government > > of > > > India for> > > > this definitions. Dr B V Raman, N C Lahiri and some of the great > > > names of> > > > jyotish were part of that committee. Now that committee examined > > > all the> > > > issues related to sunrise and came to a final conclusion to > > follow > > > a> > > > particular ayanamsa and a particular definition of sunrise. Are > > we > > > to say> > > > that they were fools instead of trying to follow them until we > > > have a better> > > > answer. > > > > > > Before turning this into an issue of whether they were fools or > > > geniuses we should understand exactly what they said.> > > > > > Unfortunately, I have not read any publications of the Calendar > > > Reform Committee and don't even know how to obtain them. But it > > > seems like you have those documents. So can you please answer one > > > fundamental question for me?> > > > > > Did they explicitly say this this was the sunrise definition to be > > > used in astrological calculations such as Ghati Lagna?> > > > > > If yes, I have to respectfully disagree with them (without calling > > > them "fools"). If not, let us not use their names in the argument.> > > > > > Did the committee you mentioned arrive at unanimous conclusions? > > On > > > the ayanamsa issue, for example, I know that Dr Raman continued to > > > disagree even after the committe arrived at a conclusion.> > > > > > As I said, any definition based on visibility is un-workable. The > > > exact time depends on weather conditions. Moreover, sunrise may > > not > > > be visible at all on a day due to clouds or even an eclipse. So > > you > > > have to come up with a *hypothetical* definiton to create a > > > definition that results in a well-defined answer everyday. A > > > hypothetical (human-created) definition is ok for calendar > > purposes, > > > such as measuring ghatis everyday etc and keeping track of time. > > But > > > I cannot accept the use of such parameters in the calculation of > > > Ghati lagna etc.> > > > > > BTW, thank you for your clarification on ardha nadi in other > > mails. > > > At one time, you strongly felt that everybody using a uniform > > > division of rasi into 150 equal parts was wrong and that nadi was > > a > > > summary of shodasa vargas. It was a brilliant idea and I still > > feel > > > that it may be correct. But, you seem to be happy with uniform > > nadis > > > now. Well, good luck in your researches. You can JHora 7.03 to > > check > > > either kind of calculations.> > > > > > > they followed Jaimini (in a way) in equal space and time > > division.> > > > > > Yes, the key phrase is "in a way". It is not at all *clear* that > > > Jaimini meant equal space and time division to be used in vighati > > > graha, let alone nadis. So, there is *some* basis for it in > > > Jaimini's works, but it is not convincing enough.> > > > > > > I am sure each has its own use and both should> > > > be correct as they come from the rishi's.> > > > > > Can you kindly quote a rishi saying that there are 150 equal nadis > > > in each sign?> > > > > > Raghunath, click "Preferences" in menu, then "Related to > > > calculations" in the sub-menu and then "Divisional Chart > > Calculation > > > Options". Ardha nadi calculation option is at the bottom. > > > Uniform/non-uniform nadi option is two combo boxes above it.> > > > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > > > Narasimha> > > > > > -------------------------------> > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> > > ------------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.