Guest guest Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Dear friends, It is sheer ignorance to claim that the grahas are not there in the Vedas. 1) In Veda there is mention of eclipses caused due to conjunction of the Sun, the Moon and the Swarbhanu. (see Rig Veda 5.40.9). So can anybody say that there are no grahas in Veda? Please note that like the name Swarbhanu has been used in Veda in place of the astrological name Rahu, so also one need not look for the all the grahas by the same names as used in astrology. 2) The Puranas and the two Epics (ie. the Ramayana and the Mahabharata) are called the fifth Veda by the Chandogya and other Upanishads. The fifth Veda mentions the grahas. So who are we to derecognise the fifth Veda , when Veda recognises the fifth Veda? Vedas do mention grahas and one can see that if the eyes are kept open. Regards, Sunil K. Bhattacharjya --- On Sat, 10/3/09, Krishen <jyotirved wrote: Krishen <jyotirved [uSBrahmins] Re: Water on the Moon and Mars USBrahmins Saturday, October 3, 2009, 12:19 AM Sir, Jai Shri Ram! <Planets are called Grahas in Samskrit> But they are calculated from the data from JPL/NASA since all the " samskrit sidhantas " right from the Surya Sidhanta to Grahalaghava are anything but correct! <According to the Vedas nine deities(not planets) are there.> Many thanks for your clarification that there are no planets in the Vedas! <The prayers to these deiteis occur mainly in Rig Veda and Atharva Veda.> The prayers are offered to deities and not to planets since there are no planets in the Vedas! < A collection of such relevant prayers is called Navagraha Suktas.> There is no navagraha sukta in any of the Vedas, including the Atharva Veda, if for no other reasons just the simple one that there are no navagrahas in any of the Vedas, including the Atharva Veda! If there are no navagrahas, how can there be a navgraha sukta in the Vedas! <This is just to put the records straight.> No, this is actually distortion of records! We impute our own meanings to Vedic mantras just to propagate the non-Vedic Vedic astrology! I may assure you that the so called Vedic astrology is actually anti-Vedic since it is against the letter and spirit of the Vedas and every shastra! No shastra has advised us to consult some soothsayer who will advise us to propitiate non-existent mathematical points Rahu and Kethu for ameliorating our miseries caused by them through an imaginary " dosha " , which the so called Vedic astrologers calle Kalasarpa Dosha! The so called Vedic astrology has also uprooted our cultural moorings by making us clelebrate Lahiri or Ramana or Muladhara etc. Makar Sankrantis and making us forget the real Vedic phenomena like Uttarayana, Dakshinayana etc. besides the Vedic months Madhu, Madhava etc. Surprisingly, all the jyotisha shastras contain words like Kemadruma, Panaphara, apoklima, kendra etc. etc. which are nothing but Greek words! That makes it clear that the so called Vedic astrology is nothing but Greek jyotisha wine in Indian bottles! Then the billion dollar question which no jyotishi, including you, is answering is as to how did " Vedic astrologers " of the past calculate their horoscopes prior to the Surya Sidhanta of Maya the mlechha! I hope the records have been put straight now! Jai Shri Ram! A K Kaul USBrahmins@gro ups.com, G Balasubramanian <gbsub wrote: > > Sir, > Planets are called Grahas in Samskrit. According to the Vedas nine deities(not planets) are there. The prayers to these deiteis occur mainly in Rig Veda and Atharva Veda. A collection of such relevant prayers is called Navagraha Suktas. This is just to put the records straight. > G.Balasubramanian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 HAHA! I must return as a surgeon, next time around, or perhaps a lawyer! Surgeon it is ;-) RR , " C.S. Ravindramani " <ravindramani wrote: > > RR Ji, > > >>>Were all those millions, if not longer years, decades, centuries, > millenia meaningless and suddenly -- the last 5-10000 years have become so > meaningful? >>> > > I was having this question in my mind for a long time but was not able to > phrase it properly. Thanks to you that you raised it here. > > Regards, C.S. Ravindramani > > > 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.