Guest guest Posted November 15, 2009 Report Share Posted November 15, 2009 parvasudhar2065 , " hari " <harimalla wrote: Dear shri Kaulji, Namaskar! Further to my last mail let me clarify myself. From the sidereal sun in dhanistha postion to sun in makar sankranti postion,in about 1700 years,the nirayan uttaryan was shifted during the sidhanta period by 23 days. This is also clarified by Barahmihir.Then on similar guidelines, now if we shift the sidereal uttaryan from the present makar sankranti to the present dhanu sankranti position, it will serve our purpose for another about 1500- 1600 years.This is to coordinate the newly proposed sidereal uttarayan ie Dhanu sankranti(1st of solar Poush) with the actual uttarayan which now falls on 6th of solar Poush or 21 December. Regards, Hari Malla parvasudhar2065 , " hari " <harimalla@> wrote: > > Dear shri Kaulji, > Namskar! With your following statement,you are trying to thrust upon me something I did not say. > > <As such, your statements that when the sun is in Dhanishtha that is its sidereal position but when it is in a so called Sayana Makara Rashi that is its Tropical position are actually statements of an ignorant person who does not known even ABC of astronomy or geography!> > Please have a little patience and try to understand what Iam trying to say. I am trying to say that when the sun is in dhanistha it is the sidereal postion of the sun meaning as you have said the symbolic conjunction with dhanistha group of stars. So do not misinterpret me. > Regards, > Hari Malla > > HinduCalendar , " Krishen " <jyotirved@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Shri Hari Malla ji, > > > > Jai Shri Ram! > > > > < When the sun is in dhanistha, you already know that it is the sidereal > > position of the sun. Since according to your dictionary, what pertains > > to the 'star' is 'sidereal'.> > > > > Do you have any idea what it means when you say that the sun or > > Uttarayana is in Danishtha? Do you know that the sun or Uttarayana can > > never be conjunct any star or nakshatra actually? When it is said that > > the sun is in Dhanishtha, it is presumed that the sun is moving along > > the imaginary circle known as ecliptic with a particular part of yet > > another imaginary circle known as zodiac in the background. That > > particular part can be Dhanishtha or some other group or cluster, and > > the stars of that group are away be several Light years from the > > sun/earth whereas the sun itself is away by hardly a few light minutes > > from the earth! So don't you think that the sun being in Dhanishtha is > > a term used by the VJ just for mathematical computation and does not > > signify any real conjunction or anything of the sort of the sun with > > Dhanishtha? > > > > Besdies, do you know that the sun or the Moon is always in one or the > > other nakshatra and was so right from the day they came into existence? > > So do you mean to say that the sun, the moon etc. are always so called > > sidereal? Do you know that in actual astronomical calculatoins of the > > sun and moon etc. these days there are just niehter naksharas nor any > > rashis, but degrees from zero to 359.999999, with the zero degree > > starting from Vernal Equinox. Your statemens that sun is tropical or > > sidereal etc., as such, just do not make any sense at all! > > > > You must also know that " the sun is also a star " and so is > > Dhanishtha--Beta Delhpnini. Dhanishtha nakshtra group is supposed to > > have that star as one of its mileposts, according to B. G. Tilak. The > > two stars i.e. the sun and Dhanishtha can never be conjunct. For that > > matter, the sun and the moon etc. too can never be conjunct one another > > physically! All these conjunctions and oppositions etc. etc. are just > > terms for mathematical computation and nothing else. When it is said > > that the New Moon means the sun being in conjunction with the Moon, it > > is just a smybolic conjunction and that also just via the imaginary > > circle known as ecliptic! What it implies actually is that the ecliptic > > longitudes of the sun and the moon at the time of New Moon are > > identical, but that does not mean that there is any conjuncton of the > > two lumniaries! For the actual conjunction to take place, they must > > collide with one another! And the day that happens will be the day of > > Pralaya! > > > > Similarly, Uttarayana is a goegraphical phenomenon, which happens every > > year when the day is the shortest and that itself means Winter Solstice. > > When the sun and Moon were having a symbolic conjunction with one > > another at the time of the Vedanga Jyotisha, the star group Dhanishta > > was in the background---and not in conjunctoin with the sun and the > > moon--- then, i.e about 3400 years back. The Winter Solstice, viz. the > > Uttarayana these days takes place when the star group known as > > Purvashada is in the backgrouund. As and when there is a New Moon on > > the day of Winter Solstice these days, that means the conjunction of the > > Moon, the sun and the Purvashadha star group is SYMBOLIC AND NOTHING BUT > > SYMOBILC. Purvashada-I star i.e. Delta Sagittari is actually away by 84 > > Light years from the sun. So how can the sun be conjuct that star > > group? > > > > As such, your statements that when the sun is in Dhanishtha that is its > > sidereal position but when it is in a so called Sayana Makara Rashi that > > is its Tropical position are actually statements of an ignorant person > > who does not known even ABC of astronomy or geography! > > > > Thus the more I read your posts the more I am forced to conclude that > > you are either deliberately twisting every statement in a manner that is > > neither scriptural nor as per the procedure of any debate or you are > > ignorant of all the fundamentals of astronomy and scriptures and would > > not like to learn either anything from some astronomy books either. As > > such, I have decided not to answer any of your future mails. I know > > that you will interpret it as my lack of knowledge but there is a limit > > to everything including patience. > > > > Jai Shri Ram! > > > > HinduCalendar , " hari " <harimalla@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear shri Kaulji, > > > I am now somewhat pleased that at least you have started questioning > > carefully.It will be my pleasure to give you my opinion. > > > When the sun is in dhanistha, you already know that it is the sidereal > > position of the sun. Since according to your dictionary, what pertains > > to the 'star' is 'sidereal'. Thus sun position in dhanistha, as I > > understand, is the 'sidereal position of the sun'.If we use the word > > 'nirayan' to denote 'sidereal', it is the nirayan position of the sun. > > Modern Dharma shastra would use the word 'nirayan uttarayan sankranti' > > to describe it, as they have been calling the present makar sankranti > > (14th January) as 'nirayan uttarayan sankranti.' > > > They also call the present actual uttarayan on poush 6th or December > > 21st as 'sayan uttaryan sankranti'. This is the modern way of > > expressing. The word used for this type of actual uttarayan in Vedanga > > jyotish is simply 'uttarayan'. > > > Please note that I have neither studied, nor had any connection with > > any predictive knowledge. Thus the predictive connection of sayan and > > nirayan for me does not exist.I only understand sidereal by the word > > 'nirayan' and tropical by the word 'sayan'. That is all. I also see the > > difference between these two as ayanamsa-just the angular differnece > > between them. That is all. But yourself being thorough with prediction > > and predictive knowledge, always like to connect ayanamsa to predictive > > science.For me it is only the above angular difference, like a student > > of geometry would understand.If you do not understand what I mean by > > angular difference plese refer to the drawing of 'scientific basis of > > calendar reform' in Parvasudhar forum. > > > 'When the sun is in dhanistha ..uttaryan starts' would mean for me > > that even if the two did not occur at the same time, but they are said > > to occur at the same time for practical convenience for the purpose of > > celebrations and easy cognition. From the record mentioned by Barahmihir > > and also counting of padas, it does seem to have served that purpose of > > conveneience for nearly 1700 years, till the actual uttarayn reached > > makar sankranti, that is, till the actual uttarayan moved over seven > > padas of nakshyatra, by the precession of earth axis.I hope you > > understand precession in the physical way.The wobbling of the earth axis > > around the ecliptic pole. This pole is the line drawn from the center of > > the earth at right angles to the plane of the ecliptic veritcally > > upwards. This is also shown on the 'scientific basis of calendar reform' > > drawing. > > > I hope you are following my interpretations.If you think something > > different please let me know. > > > Regards, > > > Hari Malla > > > > > > HinduCalendar , " Krishen " jyotirved@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Hari Mallaji, > > > > > > > > Jai Shri Ram! > > > > > > > > < Here you will note the sun being in dhanisntha is nirayan, but > > > > uttaryan is sayan.> > > > > > > > > That is news to me that when the sun is in dhanishtha it is nirayana > > but > > > > because it is the day of Uttarayana simultaneously, it is sayana! > > BTW, > > > > what is dhaishtha nakshatra itself according to you? sayana or > > nirayana > > > > or neither or coordinated, as you would like to call your system? > > And > > > > what is uttarayana in itself according to you? Sayana or nirayana or > > > > neither or coordinated? Then again, what do you mean by the VJ sun > > > > being nirayana and sayana? Till date I was under the impression that > > > > any longitude of any planet minus an imaginary figure known as > > ayanamsha > > > > is nirayana, and it if is without that tonsure samskar of ayanamsha, > > it > > > > is sayana! What was the ayanamsha at the time of the VJ and what > > > > forumulae has the VJ given to calculate them? If there are no such > > > > formulae in the VJ then how do you calculate the ayanamsha for that > > > > period, because we do not have any astronomical works of that on the > > > > pattern of the Surya Sidhanta of Maya the mlechha, which were later > > > > " impregnated " with " beeja samskaras " of ayanamsha---even if those > > > > samskaras were just interpolations! > > > > > > > > <You do not seem to be analysing this fact carefully.> > > > > > > > > You do not seem to be analysing this fact carefully. > > > > > > > > Jai Shri Ram! > > > > > > > > A K Kaul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > HinduCalendar , " hari " <harimalla@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Shri Kaulji, > > > > > namaskar! > > > > > <This aadesha-patra clearly advises that we must celebrate all the > > > > festivals on the basis of sayana rashis, as per dharmashastras. > > > > > (Shri Hari Malla, pl. note!)> > > > > > The dharma shastras want us to celebrate on both the sayan rashis > > and > > > > the nirayn rashis.It is generally sayan rashi but exactly nirayan > > > > rashi.What do you make of this? This is clearly mentioned in many > > > > places.The best shastra for this is the vedanga jyotish, which > > > > says,'when the sun and the mooon are together in dhanistha,.. > > uttarayan > > > > starts.' Here you will note the sun being in dhanisntha is nirayan, > > but > > > > uttaryan is sayan. You do not seem to be analysing this fact > > > > carefully.You have tendency to jump to conclusion.Sorry to say so. > > > > > When you are so sincere and devoted,I would like to ask you again > > to > > > > kindly be more cautious in observing this fact of coordination of > > sayan > > > > and nirayan.I feel one must be more careful than both Shankar > > > > Balakrishna Dixit and Bala gangadhar Tilak to understand this > > fact.In > > > > fact, we must coordinate the concepts of both of these stalwarts of > > the > > > > eighteenth century to understand the true vedic system of > > coordination. > > > > Can you do so? Please try once again. Thank you. > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Hari Malla > > > > > > > > > > HinduCalendar , " Krishen " jyotirved@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear friends, > > > > > > > > > > > > I have posted a copy of Aadesha Patra of Jagadguru > > Shankaracharya of > > > > > > Dwarka, which was uploaded by Shri Narayan Prasad in the files > > > > > > section. > > > > > > > > > > > > This aadesha Patra was copied by him from Marathi edition of > > Shri S. > > > > B. > > > > > > Dikshit's work " jyotisha shastrachai itihas " . It was issued by > > His > > > > > > Holiness Jagadguru Shankaracharya of Dwarka more than a hundred > > > > years > > > > > > back on a representation made by Shri Lele. This aadesha-patra > > > > clearly > > > > > > advises that we must celebrate all the festivals on the basis of > > > > sayana > > > > > > rashis, as per dharmashastras. > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shri Hari Malla, pl. note!) > > > > > > > > > > > > Ironically, however, that very mutt itself is celebrating all > > the > > > > > > festivals on the basis of so called nirayana (almighty > > > > Lahiri!)rashis, > > > > > > most probably, because that mutt does not have the inclination > > to > > > > > > prepare a correct panchanga on its own! > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Darshaney Lokesh can approach that mutt with his correct > > > > > > Tithi-patrak. > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Shri Ram! > > > > > > > > > > > > A K Kaul > > > > > > > > > > > > PS I am reqeusting Sanskrit scholars to give a running > > translation > > > > of > > > > > > this aadesha patra in English. > > > > > > > > > > > > AKK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- End forwarded message --- 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.