Oneness and Manyness of Forms (What Parasara Advocates...)

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

Dear Narasimha and Sanjay

Pranams,

I was intriqued to read these posts.As it so vividly reminded me of

something,

One time when i was going through the most emotionally painful part

of my life.. I was praying to Krishna to please reveal himself to

me, so that by looking at him, even in a dream I can be freed from

my mundane but very painful emotions.

In my trance like state, (I think I had cried myself into a

stuporlike trance.)

I immediately saw Krishna , he was far away, there was bright light

all around him, I somehow was already laying flat, I tried to crawl

closer to really " see " him as I got closer and closer I fixed my

eyes to where his feet should be, but there were tiny grains , that

looked like sand, all glitering with an incredible radiance, the

birghtness was so intense that I was only able to see somewhat of

Krishna's lotus feet, I tried to look higher up but the radiance was

so intense , each grain, so reflective of Krishna's potency, energy,

shakti or whatever that I could'nt see past that point.

After awhile I felt like I shouldnt attempt to see Krishna so I

lowered my head/face downward, stretched out my hands in surrender.

Then Krishna was gone.After that I've always felt like Krishna is

always present, just due to my inablity to see him was all.

 

Another time, going through a similiar excruciatingly painful time,

I also prayed to " GOD " (this was before I found him as " Krishna "

again,it was very similiar,,, I was far away out in space, with

stars around and in the distance, I could see my God far out in the

distance, I wanted to come closer to submit to him. But as I got

closer every speck was like a billion lights and each speck got

brighter and brighter ,at the same time , they each

multiplied/expanded over and over.

Soon, " God " filled the whole universe including me and I was

surrounded by light, and I understood the principle that we are

part and parcel of the Supreme Lord.

Anyway, so I found the analogy very nice.

Best wishes

Lakshmi

sohamsa , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr

wrote:

>

> Pranaam Sanjay,

>

> > (1) Given that Parasara explicitly mentioned Shiva and Gouri in

the context

> > of ishta devata, I take objection to anyone who claims that they

cannot be

> > ishta devatas and only Vishnu's forms can be.

> > [s.Rath:] Again form! There is no form in the 12th house. There

cannot be a

> > form in the 12th house. This is where everykind of form ends.

This is where

> > the body or bodies end. This is the state of the body at death.

>

> Let me respectfully remind you that this whole discussion is about

forms. I will write a little later on why different forms are even

needed.

>

> > Have I not given such a clear and lucid explanation about the

meaning of

> > 12th house and vishnu as 'sarva-vyapakesa'. Then tell me from

the physical

> > universe viewpoint.

> > Is vishnu there in the flower? The answer is yes

> > Is Vishnu there in the tree? The answer is yes

>

> That's all fine. But a devotee of Kaali like Ramakrishna will

eventually reach the stage where he sees Kaali in flowers, trees etc

(just as you may aspire to see Vishnu in everything). A great

devotee of Shiva will eventually see Shiva in everything.

>

> It is possible to devote to several deities and eventually start

seeing the deity in everything that exists.

>

> Even as you exclaim " again form! " , you ARE getting lost in forms

and thinking that only Vishnu's form has the characteristic you

explained above.

>

> In order to explain this more clearly, let me go back to the

analogy I gave earlier. This fantastic analogy is from my spiritual

guru.

>

> -------------- Quote Begin --------------

> Imagine God to be a bright star in the sky. When you see from a

distance, star seems tiny and you conclude that there is only one

God. If you start moving towards God, you realize as you get closer

that the star is in reality a huge diamond with 330 million faces.

Each face is several miles long and wide and has various attributes

(gunas). One face may be red and hot and another may be blue and

cold etc. So, as you get closer to the diamond, you have to pick one

face to get close to.

>

> Now, when you get too close to a face, the whole world will seem

to have the attributes of that face. For example, if you get too

close to a face that is cold and blue, then the whole world will

feel cold and blue to you. In other words, the God you are getting

close to is the Supreme god of the world and fills the entire world

as you experience it.

>

> This is the ultimate goal in sadhana for one adhering to Dwaita

siddhanta (duality). For them, getting close to ishta devata and

securing a place near the feet is the highest goal.

>

> For some, there is a next stage: As you get closer and closer to

the face you picked, you finally merge with it! This is the ultimate

goal in sadhana for one adhering to Visishtaadwaita.

>

> To Advaitis, this communion with a Saguna ( " with attributes " ) form

of God is not the final goal. The final goal is to break through the

face and jump into the inside of the diamond. As you break through

the face of the diamond into which you merge and jump into the

interior of the diamond, you no longer perceive the faces of the

diamond or the world outside. There are no longer any objects or

attributes. The experiencer, experienced and experience all merge

into one.

> -------------- Quote End --------------

>

> Read the above analogy carefully. Imagine Vishnu, Shiva etc to be

faces of the diamond in the above analogy. If you get too close to

Vishnu, you will indeed see Vishnu in everything and you 'realize'

that Vishnu is the supreme god of this universe and fills everything

that exists. You see Vishnu in even Shiva. Similarly, if you get too

close to Shiva, you will indeed see Shiva in everything and

you 'realize' that Shiva is the supreme god of this universe and

fills everything that exists. You see Shiva in even Vishnu.

>

> It is as simple as that.

>

> But then, one may ask what is the importance of picking ishta

devata based on chart. If it is possible to see Vishnu in Shiva or

Shiva in Vishnu, what is the big deal in choosing a deity? Why can't

one pray to a random deity?

>

> The answer is that the stage of perceiving the ishta devata in all

gods and everything that exists has not been reached by most people.

Our ishta devata prescriptions are for people who are yet to reach

that stage. In terms of my analogy, the journey to different faces

of the diamond takes different times based on where you stand right

now. If you pick a face that is closest to you based on where you

are, you reach the diamond faster. For example, if you choose a face

on the other side, it will take considerably longer to reach it. On

the contrary, if you select a face that is closest to you, you reach

it faster.

>

> Similarly, if you choose a form (face of the diamond of divinity)

that is closest to you based on where you stand in karmic evolution

(i.e. based on all previous karmas and samskaras), you reach god

faster. Once you reach the chosen face and get too close to it, you

will see that deity in the entire universe. Someone with different

samskaras may choose a different deity and reach a different face

and that person will see that deity in the entire universe. There is

no contradiction here!

>

> Thus, while trying to surrender to a random deity may eventually

work, surrendering to some specific deities may work faster based on

your previous karmas. That is what astrologers should try to figure

out. Instead of setting one on a different course, if we help one

continue the course one was on already (from various lives), we

would have done a good thing!

>

> Thus, my humble appeal is this: Let us not restrict to one deity

(e.g. Vishnu) based on OUR OWN samskaras. Let us recommend all

deities based on the native's inclination, samskaras and karmas.

>

> I hope my view on prescribing only Vishnu's avataras as ishta

devatas is better understood after this detailed mail!

>

> * * *

>

> I referred to Saptashati rahasyam to show that Mahaakaali is

composed of tamoguna. You wrote:

>

> > [s.Rath:] Mahakaali is different from Kaali just as Mahalakshmi

is different

> > from Lakshmi. So we are talking of different moods of the same

mother. As

>

> When I said Kaali is taamasik, you said that Kaali is very pure

(as though tamas implies impurity!) and said that karna pisachini

etc are taamasik devatas and gave quiet a narrow interpretation

of " taamasik devatas " . Now, you seem to be accepting that Mahaakaali

is taamasik. I hope you agree that this taamasik Mahaakaali

is " pure " .

>

> As you seem to agree that MahaaKaali is taamasik, I hope that is

not stopping you from linking MahaaKaali with spiritual progress. I

hope you don't view tamas as something that cannot aid in spiritual

progress.

>

> > Mahaakaali she gives victory in wars whereas as Dakshina Kaali

she gives the

> > supreme path of spirituality. So to say that Kaali is taamasik

is wrong as

> > Mahaakaali is her mood when she is going to war and she is not

always in

> > this mood. The three Devis go to war with the three names of

MahaaSaraswati,

> > Mahalakshmi and mahaKaali forming the Chamunda Hridaya mantra.

this is the

> > most powerful war mantra...so your argument is not right as the

single mood

> > cannot determine the overall being of the devata.

>

> Just as you gave a narrow interpretation of tamas and taamasik

devatas and brought in connotations of purity and impurity wrongly

in the previous mail, you are interpreting Mahaakaali narrowly in

this mail.

>

> MahaaKaali is not just about wars. When the three supreme mothers -

MahaaSaraswati, MahaaKaali and MahaaLakshmi - go to war together as

you say above, it is obviously not just war over your physical

enemies for some material purposes. That is a lower level meaning.

At the highest level, the three make one win over the internal

enemies (shadripus) and all weaknesses that are binding one to a

limited existence and blocking one's liberation. Apart from the

shadripus, even the simple notion that " I am this body " is an enemy

that one has to fight in order to gain liberation. To an Advaitin,

even the notion that " I am a soul separate from Brahman " is an enemy

that needs to be defeated in order to gain liberation.

>

> That is the highest war and the three supreme Mothers can make one

win it.

>

> Thus, I totally disagree with your separation of " victory in wars "

and " supreme path of spirituality " . This is a narrow interpretation

of MahaaKaali (and, by extension, of the three supreme mothers you

listed above with respect to the powerful war mantra). They can gave

victory in the highest war we ever fight also and hence enable the

highest success in the supreme path of spirituality, i.e. be

liberated.

>

> * * *

>

> > [s.Rath:] Faith in the basics shall open the mind for the higher

truths.

>

> Perhaps that is what is happening right now...

>

> > Firstly I don't know from where the " SJC formula " came. If it is

in any book

> > or letter, then please ignore it as there can never be one

formula for SJC

> > (at least during my headship of SJC) for spirituality.

>

> I am very glad you cleared that one!

>

> > I found you copying this mail to so many other groups. Why is it

so? If they

> > need to know they can come here and see the discussions.

>

> Well, I think differently. If the mail makes atleast one person

think on every group, the purpose is served. Sorry if you don't like

this.

>

> > not is, as far as I am concerned, not open to debate! The fact

that Parasara

> > explicitly listed them means they can be ishta devatas. Period.

> > [s.Rath:] What is meant by

> > " period " in the end of your sentence? The meaning given in the

websers

> > dictionary is as below. Which of these did you mean?

> > pe-ri-od (peer'ee uhd) n. <snip>

>

> Check

>

> http://education./reference/dictionary/entry/period

>

> Meaning 10 is the one. When we say something conclusive, we

write " period " to emphasize it.

>

> > Whether deities not explicitly listed by Parasara can be ishta

devatas or

> > not is debatable.

> > [s.Rath:] Again debate. Why is this debatable? I thought we had

agreed on

> > this point.

>

> WE agreed. But, if someone ELSE disagrees, it is valid. This is

something on which a subjective judgment has to be made. But,

regarding the suitability of deities explicitly listed by Parasara,

there is no need for debate. That is what I am saying.

>

> Enough for now. If I left out any points without replying, sorry.

>

> May the light of Brahman shine within,

> 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 gurave namah |

> > Dear Narasimha,

> >

> > Firstly I don't know from where the " SJC formula " came. If it is

in any book

> > or letter, then please ignore it as there can never be one

formula for SJC

> > (at least during my headship of SJC) for spirituality. If there

is one

> > statement that is going to be the breadth of SJC's spiritual

vision during

> > my period, it can be summed up as the statement of Sri

Ramakrishna

> > Paramhamsa: " jat mat tat path " (Bengali: There are as many paths

[to God] as

> > there are opinions or minds) and anything smaller than this is

just a

> > manifestation of individual narrowmindedness due to lack of

appreciation of

> > divinity and their personal world view which can be glimpsed

after a careful

> > examination of their 9th houses.

> >

> > There are some new area that have opened due to this discussion

and

> > clarifications. I am giving my opinion and views ans am sure you

will also

> > communicate yours. I am packing for Serbia and will reply to

your mail after

> > my return. Thereafter we can continue this discussion in

California and

> > later also. I am sure with all this the SJC USA conference in

California is

> > going to be something as we discuss this in extended hours after

the

> > conference with everyone.

> >

> > I found you copying this mail to so many other groups. Why is it

so? If they

> > need to know they can come here and see the discussions. Also if

lakshmi or

> > someone who is so new to all this (comparatively) or even Robert

says

> > something, I take it easy and let it pass, but not you

Narasimha. We have

> > agreed on most points but a few remain.

> >

> > comments below in blue -

> >

> > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > Sanjay Rath

> >

> > <Previous Mail>

> >

> > Dear Sanjay,

> >

> > > Why did you say that? According to the argument you were just

giving in a

> > > previous mail it should be Durga for Rahu in 12th house. Why

did you

> > change

> > > to Vyankateswara?

> >

> > You have misunderstood me. I did not and do not say that

Vishnu's avataras

> > should be avoided. Nor did I say that we should strictly stick

to the short

> > list Parasara gave for guidance. But I had two issues:

> >

> > (1) Given that Parasara explicitly mentioned Shiva and Gouri in

the context

> > of ishta devata, I take objection to anyone who claims that they

cannot be

> > ishta devatas and only Vishnu's forms can be.

> > [s.Rath:] Again form! There is no form in the 12th house. There

cannot be a

> > form in the 12th house. This is where everykind of form ends.

This is where

> > the body or bodies end. This is the state of the body at death.

> >

> > The form is in the 9th house, in the temples and churches and

mosques where

> > men try to put God in a box and makes rules about how to reach

Him and how

> > they should conduct themselves socially and in groups and as

individuals. If

> > others are making the mistake of saying that they can only see

the " forms of

> > Vishnu " in the 12th house, in what way are you also not adding

to the same

> > mistake by saying that there are " other forms instead of Vishnu

forms " in

> > the 12th house. You are still thinking about what others are

saying and not

> > what I am saying.

> >

> > Have I not given such a clear and lucid explanation about the

meaning of

> > 12th house and vishnu as 'sarva-vyapakesa'. Then tell me from

the physical

> > universe viewpoint.

> > Is vishnu there in the flower? The answer is yes

> > Is Vishnu there in the tree? The answer is yes

> > Is Vishnu there in the pillar? The answer is yes

> > Is Vishnu there in you? The answer is yes

> > Then what is the form of Vishnu that I must attach the mind to -

the flower,

> > the tree, the pillar or to you? The external skin that forms the

boundary

> > for the physical bodies of all beings defines their physical

form as seen by

> > the eye but that which cannot be seen by the naked eye is the

akasa that

> > caused the elemets to come together to create the form in the

first place

> > and this is vishnu, the essence of the AKASA tattva that cause

the creation.

> > This is the prasava-karana devata of the 12th house and since

the 12th house

> > is associated with the bed, the learned say that he is sleeping

or resting

> > as if on a couch.

> >

> > Parasara says Shiva, Gouri and other names for the 12th house

from karakamsa

> > as it is this aspect that we have got attached to and it is this

that we

> > have to transcend. If a person has Sun in the 12th from

Karakamsa he will be

> > very attached to Shiva, as if Shiva is his lord or boss and then

there is

> > the saying " fear of the lord is the begining of wisdom " . So this

is the

> > begining of the wisdom and this was the begining of Thakur's

awakening in

> > this world as he played the role of Shiva in the village plays

and went into

> > instant samadhi!

> >

> > AKASA tatva has the magnetic power (jupiter has the largest

magnetic field)

> > and the power of attraction is this nature of the akasa tatva.

So by

> > attracting the soul towards this final resting point, God takes

forms and

> > symbols as the tools for teaching him. So, any form that we see

associated

> > with the 12th house is incidental and not the cause of the

moksa. Moksa

> > comes when we transcend that form. Similarly the symbols like

nama and rasa,

> > like rupa (form) have to be transcended with 'om' (Srimad

Bhagavatam) to

> > realize the essence that is everywhere.

> >

> > If Thakur saw Kali everywhere then that means he had transcended

the form,

> > name and flavor associated with Kali as per the various dhyana

of Kali. The

> > dhyana are the forms and imagery associated with the 9th house

as the dharma

> > of the devata and one has to transcend them before beeing in the

state of

> > jivana-mukta. That is why the Chandrakala nadi talks of the 12th

house from

> > karakamsa as the jivana-muktaamsa.

> >

> > Whether deities not explicitly listed by Parasara can be ishta

devatas or

> > not is debatable.

> > [s.Rath:] Again debate. Why is this debatable? I thought we had

agreed on

> > this point.

> >

> > But, whether deities explicitly listed by Parasara can be ishta

devatas or

> > not is, as far as I am concerned, not open to debate! The fact

that Parasara

> > explicitly listed them means they can be ishta devatas. Period.

> > [s.Rath:] That is the same thing that I said in the very first

mail

> > regarding taking of names that has started this thread. What is

meant by

> > " period " in the end of your sentence? The meaning given in the

websers

> > dictionary is as below. Which of these did you mean? I think it

is a bit out

> > of context as we were not talking about time or dasa in any

manner. If it is

> > a slang then I will advise you to try to stop using it. Believe

me it is not

> > worth it as it spoils the language.

> > pe-ri-od (peer'ee uhd) n. <snip>

> >

> > (2) Given that so many deities are lauded in various scriptures

as givers of

> > moksha, I object to the claim that only Vishnu grants moksha.

> > [s.Rath:] That would amount to saying that only Indians get

moksha and the

> > rest of the world has no hope! Of course its pathetic. But then

to say that

> > " one who cannot see his devata as Vishnu " , will be granted

moksha is also

> > wrong. The devata has to be seen as the devata of all and in all

thngs big

> > and small.

> >

> > * * *

> >

> > > So you see you are also saying what I am saying and this

saying is based

> > on

> > > your Ista devata guiding you *intuitively* and not all

mathematics and

> > > program.

> >

> > Yes.

> >

> > There are so many deities and only 9 planets. So, to me, each

planet shows

> > umpteen deities (rather than just one Vishnu avatara). I try to

judge based

> > on various sign/planet influences on the planet in question to

narrow down

> > to a short list of deities. Then I have to select one among the

short list

> > of deities, using intuition.

> > [s.Rath:] but the sign/planet correlation you did for Dhira

Krishna was

> > very interesting. Aquarius Mountains, Rahu Varaha-avatara so it

was Balaji.

> > Now look at this logic:

> > Aquarius - Mountains, Rahu - Durga, so it has to be Vaishno Devi

who is the

> > Durga of the mountains or Durga at Haridwar or any other

mountain shrine of

> > Durga. Is there anything wrong with this? If not then your logic

of choosing

> > Vyankaeswara is wrong and it will not work again.

> > In another case of Hari Mahalingam you have also advised

Vyankateswara for

> > Rahu in Gemini with Venus in 12th house from karakamsa and he

has confirmed

> > that he feels the closeness to Balaji.

> > One sadhu of the Ramakrishna mission says that the greatness of

Balaji is

> > that whoever goes to him, He appears in the form of the Ista

devata to that

> > person!!! Thats true as I have always seen Jagannath whenever I

have gone to

> > Balaji. So we cannot have any logic and should all prescribe the

deities

> > randomly.

> >

> > I honestly don't think that I am capable of giving perfect

guidance with the

> > imperfect knowledge I have. So I leave it to Mother Sri

Mahalakshmi. If She

> > wants me to give the correct guidance in someone's sadhana, She

will inspire

> > me accordingly.

> > [s.Rath:] I really admire this thing in you. This is what I had

seen so many

> > years back and will always like you because of this. It is a

mark of the

> > true bhakta. For me too, after all the logic it has to be

> > jagannatha-arpanamastu

> >

> > > In fac if Ramakrishna Paramhamsa came to you to ask for

> > > Ista devata and that chart, what would you have told him?

> >

> > I would have loved to note the lord of 12th from karakamsa,

Jupiter, being

> > stronger than Sun in 12th and Saturn in moolatrikona dominating

over Jupiter

> > and would have loved to suggest " Taarana Kaali " .

> >

> > Similarly, if Aurobindo had come to me, I would have loved to

suggest

> > sadhana of Savitri. If Ramana Maharshi had come to me, I would

have loved to

> > send him to Arunachaleshwara.

> >

> > I am simply seeking better rules that would have allowed me to

do so!

> > [s.Rath:] Faith in the basics shall open the mind for the higher

truths.

> >

> > * * *

> >

> > Regarding my statement that Kaali is taamsik, you wrote:

> >

> > > Kali is very pure and a sister or Krishna. In Puri we are

taught that she

> > is

> > > Parameswari and that children can worship her for anything.

> > >

> > > America is ridden with all kinds of sex tantras and they have

all kinds of

> > > devata guiding them. That is taamasik devata. Karna Pisachini

is a

> > taamasik

> > > devata.

> >

> > This is very tough to understand or appreciate for most people

and hence I

> > prefer to not go there, but let me briefly make a couple of

important

> > points.

> >

> > That Mahaakaali is taamasik is not my invention. Saptashati uses

the

> > adjective " taamasi " (taamasik) to describe Her. Saptashati

rahasyam (from

> > Maarkendeya puraanam) clearly describes how Mahaalakshmi came

into existence

> > first from nothingness, how Mahaakaali and Mahaasaraswati came

from Her and

> > how they brought to existence one male and one female deity each

(i.e.

> > Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva and their consorts).

> > [s.Rath:] Mahakaali is different from Kaali just as Mahalakshmi

is different

> > from Lakshmi. So we are talking of different moods of the same

mother. As

> > Mahaakaali she gives victory in wars whereas as Dakshina Kaali

she gives the

> > supreme path of spirituality. So to say that Kaali is taamasik

is wrong as

> > Mahaakaali is her mood when she is going to war and she is not

always in

> > this mood. The three Devis go to war with the three names of

MahaaSaraswati,

> > Mahalakshmi and mahaKaali forming the Chamunda Hridaya mantra.

this is the

> > most powerful war mantra...so your argument is not right as the

single mood

> > cannot determine the overall being of the devata.

> >

> > In that account, it is clearly said that Mahaakaali is composed

of the guna

> > tamas and Mahalakshmi is composed of the guna sattwa. Thus,

Mahaakaali being

> > taamasik is based in scripture and not my creation.

> > [s.Rath:] The Mahaakaali bija is KliiM which is the same as

Krishna bija so

> > technically, MahaaKaali = Krishna, but the Kaali bija is kriiM

(with an 'R')

> > and is completely different in its color etc. Everyone here

knows about

> > Krishna that when He goes to war, the rest just give up their

bodies! Thats

> > kleeM vija.

> >

> > Again Mahalakshmi is HriiM whereas Lakshmi is ShriiM. Please

explain the

> > gunas to me with these vijas so that I can understand what you

are trying to

> > say.

> >

> >

> > You have to bear in mind here that all tamas is not equal and

all rajas is

> > not equal either. If Karna Pisachini is a taamasik devata and

Mahaakaali is

> > a taamasik devata, it does not make them equal.

> >

> > All darkness is not equal. Darkness that prevents you from

seeing good is

> > bad and darkness that prevents you from seeing bad is good.

> > [s.Rath:] That is a superb analogy. You deserve kudos for this

one

> > statement.

> >

> > Also, all tamas is not " impure " as you imply. All darkness is

not impure and

> > all ignorance is not impure. Removing light from certain things

and

> > developing ignorance of certain things can be actually quite

pure!

> > [s.Rath:] Logic seems fine, but can you give me an example where

knowledge

> > of anything is bad. Just about anything.

> >

> > Even sex which was taboo in modern India due to the effect of

islamisation

> > of north India, was discussed in quite a lot of detail in the

Kamasutra of

> > Vatsayana. Not to forget Arthashastra and other such literature

which are

> > written by sages and seers.

> >

> > I need an example to understand this point.

> >

> > Yes, Kaali is very pure. But that does not imply that she

is " saattwik " .

> > Mahaakaali IS taamasik as Saptashati rahasyam unambiguously

states. If this

> > fact does not make sense to some, perhaps they are missing

something! As I

> > said earlier, taamasik devatas (esp those taamasik devatas who

are very

> > pure) are tough to understand. In fact, understanding the three

gunas fully

> > is also not easy.

> > [s.Rath:] Dakshina Kaali is PURE SATVA, please think again on

this. I am

> > merely trying to say that the mood of the devata is very crucial

for

> > understanding mantra sadhana and mantra shastra. Think of guna

as resulting

> > in moods of four kind - uttama, madhyama, adhama and udaasina.

Then the

> > effet of the gunas can be understood, else we will be just

painting deities

> > as black and white without understanding the reasons forthe

color and its

> > effetc on us.

> >

> > May the light of Brahman shine within,

> > 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

> > -------------------------------

>