Fw: [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in Vedic literature, the Relev

June 22, 2009

SB,

< Third question is about Uttarayana occurring in Dhanistha Nakshatra. We all

know that Uttarayana occurs in a Nakshatra for one thousand years and it first

occurred in Dhanistha around 2400 BCE and then it ended around 1400 BCE. >

Read VEDAS, in it they have mentioned NKS of unequal divisions and same has been

taken up in VEDANAGA JYOTISH.

According to your own statement NKS have been mentioned as cluster of stars so

how it could be of equal divisions.BTW you need to read VEDAS first than should

jump in discussions.

Now come to the point.They were talking of DELPHI star to refer as point of

UTTARAYANA. so now count according to calculation based on 50 (as precession).

< Tapa as you very well know is the Tropical or Seasonal month starting at the

time of the Uttarayana. >

When something is starting from UTTARAYANA than how it could be sidereal. You

are really very funny!!!

< Yes, this clarification is needed from you.

Probably you will have to quote the definition of Lagna such as " Lagnanam udou

Surya " or whatever you think proper. Correct me if I am wrong. >

Is it mentioned in VEDANAGA JYOTISH or VEDAS??BTW some JYOTIHIS have told to

calculate lagna by MOON's movements just to make stories to defend point of

LAGNA.

< Now AKK has also a doubt about the Mrigachakra. He says that the " Bha-chakra "

means " Nakshatra-chakra " . He thinks " Mriga-chakra " should also be

" Nakshatra-chakra " . In my opinion the animal representaion is for the Rashi and

not Nakshatra. >

SB,i was not expecting that you will talk like this, he he he he,

here MRIGA, means MRIGASIRA NKS not DEER(HIRAN) means animal about which you are

thinking

--- On Mon, 22/6/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya

Re: Fw: Re: [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in Vedic literature,

the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

Monday, 22 June, 2009, 4:56 AM

Dear Vinay,

I think the question asked by Shri Singh is whether by Lagna you can mean only

the Ascendeant (Rising Sun ie. in which the Sun rises in the morning) or this

should also mean the Rising Moon. Yes, this clarification is needed from you.

Probably you will have to quote the definition of Lagna such as " Lagnanam udou

Surya " or whatever you think proper. Correct me if I am wrong.

Secondly I am sure you have seen the verse where it is said that Magha, Tapa in

Shukla paksha and Uttarayana occur(ed) together. Tapa as you very well know is

the Tropical or Seasonal month starting at the time of the Uttarayana. Did you

by any chance goof up anywhere that you are being asked this question? Goofing

up happens once in a way in case of everybody.

Third question is about Uttarayana occurring in Dhanistha Nakshatra. We all know

that Uttarayana occurs in a Nakshatra for one thousand years and it first

occurred in Dhanistha around 2400 BCE and then it ended around 1400 BCE. The

question asked means whether you took the beginning of Uttarayana in the

Dhanistha or the ending of Uttaraya in the Dhanistha. I take the beginning of

the occurrence of the Uttarayana as that appears to me to be meaning of that

verse.

I think these questions are not tough for a scholar like you.

Now AKK has also a doubt about the Mrigachakra. He says that the " Bha-chakra "

means " Nakshatra-chakra " . He thinks " Mriga-chakra " should also be

" Nakshatra-chakra " . In my opinion the animal representaion is for the Rashi and

not Nakshatra. Once you identify the Rashi ithe identification of the Nakshatra

within the Rashi is not a problem at all. After all the imaginary animal

representation came to be used only for identification of the Rashis by the

naked-eye astronomers of the ancient times, otherwise how could they have

distingished the Rashis. Correct me if I am wrong.

Best wishes,

Sunil K. BHattacharjya

--- On Sun, 6/21/09, singh_ramveer <singh_ramveer@ .in> wrote:

singh_ramveer <singh_ramveer@ .in>

Fw: Re: [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in Vedic literature, the

Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

Sunday, June 21, 2009, 2:52 PM

< Rg Vedanga Jyotisha verse-19 mentions " Lagna " . The very concept of Lagna

proves that the idea of 12 astrological houses and raashis was present >

You have taunted over commentrators as Modern commentartors. Should we consider

you modern or ancient??

Now come to the point:-

What is the guarantee that Lagna was being find out only by Sun's movement.

You would not be aware that Jyotishis have also said that Lagna can also be

calculated by Moon's movement.

Except this, you have talked of Jaimini, Brihat Jataka etc etc... which are not

very older works, and even in those works they have not talked of any ayanamsa.

Jha you didnt tell about the verse of Vedanga Jyotish in which there is talk of

Uttarayana, now tell us that Uttarayana doesnt show that they were talking o

seasons.But you dont want to put those verses between public

You also have not told us about that verse in which he talksed of Uttarayan in

Dhanista Nks and by taking precesion of 50 we can reach to near about 1500 BC

means time when Vedanaga Jyotish was written.

But you challenged ppl that nobody can show that VEDANGA JYOTISH had been

authored in 1500 BC.

Thanks

> , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote:

> >

> > To Mr Avinash Sathaye (and Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya and all concerned),

> >

> > Mr Sunil Bhattacharjya had quoted Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha - verse 5: <<<

'Meenan prabhriti RasayaH' means Meena and other Rashis. " >>>

> >

> > You said : <<< " Please tell us what edition of VJ is this? I cannot locate

this verse

> > in my copy at all. I wrote the fifth verse in mine already. I also gave

> > the exact reference to my source. Please reciprocate. " >>>

> >

> > Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha - verse 5 says " Ye Brihaspatinaa bhuktaa Meenat

prabriti Raashayah... "

> >

> > But

> > some modern commentators think that this is a later interpolation.

> > Whether it is an interpolation or an original verse, no publisher has a

> > right to remove this verse from the text because it is mentioned in the

> > extant manuscripts. Throw away such spurious editions.

> >

> > Both Rg

> > and Yaajush branches of Vedanga Jyotisha mention following verse :

> > " Nirekam Dvaashashaardhaabda m dvigunam gatsamjnikam, shashtyaa

> > shashtyaa yutam dvaabhyaam parvanaa Raashiruchyate. "

> >

> > Rg Vedanga Jyotisha verse-19 mentions " Lagna " . The very concept of Lagna

proves that the idea of 12 astrological houses and raashis was present.

> >

> > I wonder why you are doubting such explicit evidences ?

> >

> > Brihat Jatak says that Riksha is a synonymn of raashi. Riksha is mentioned

as a group of stare in RgVeda 1.24.10

> >

> > Chhandogya Upanishada is a part of Samveda's Talavakaara Braahmana, which

says that Narada Ji

> > was an expert of " Raashi Vidyaa " , in addition to many other vidyaas,

> > and this fact is attested by Narada Purana which gives more details of

Astrology including its astronomy than any other Purana.

> >

> > Now come to Vedic interpretation. You say " mImAMsakas (Mimaansakas) made

their method of interpretation as a logical system with

> > rules and deductions which can be consistently applied everywhere. That

> > way, even the people who do not agree with them cannot brush them aside

> > as just arbitrary interpreters. Yaska in his work also established and

> > applied rules illustrated with examples. I wish the believers in the

parokSha meanings would do something comparable. "

> >

> > The

> > method of Mimaansakas is strictly applicable only to karmakaandic

> > aspect of Vedic mantras. They neglect the Adhyaatmika aspect almost

> > completely, and do not pay attention to other aspects which do not

> > concern them. They even distort the original meaning of Jaimini and

> > many Mimaansakas have expelled Ishvara and made Mimaansaa almost an

> > atheist philosophy, in spite of Jaimini's strict order that if the

> > performer of Yajna does not remain " attached to the Omnipotent Main /

> > Supreme Being, it is a Dosha (and the Yajna is fruitless " . Kumarila

> > Bhatta & c tried to salvage Mimaansaa from the clutches of Asuric

> > Mimaansakas.

> >

> > These " experts " themselves introduce paroksha meaning and ignore the obvious

meaning of mantras. Here is an example :

> >

> > Rgveda 8.96.8 says : " Trih shashtih tvaa Marutah Vavridhaanaah usraah iva

raashyah.... "

> >

> > Sayana

> > translated " raashayah " as " collections of cows " (:gaava iva

> > samgheebhootaaste. ... " ). Let us translate this mantra literally,

> > assuming we do not know the meaning of " Raashi " . The mantra says :

> >

> > " 180 Marutas like Raashis of day make you (Indra) grow... "

> >

> > In

> > his commentary on this mantra, Sayana mentions various numbers of

> > Marutas in various mantras. Here, the number is 180, which is clearly

> > related to Uttaraayana which is day of the Gods and during which Gods

> > like Indra grow. According to Suryasiddhanta and all ancient

> > siddhantas, planetary motions are caused by Pravaha Vaayu, which is

> > also a part of Marutas. There are many types of Marutas, and here the

> > mantra clearly speaks of " 180 Maruts collected like (six) Raashis of

> > (divine) day " , but Sayana translated Usraa as " cows " and not as " days " ,

> > although Rgveda uses this term in both meanings in various mantras

> > according to Monier Williams. 180 days make one divine day from divine

> > sunrise (Makara Samkraanti) to divine sunset, during which Indra grows.

> > This meaning will automatically connect this mantra's meaning to that

> > of Sage Deerghatamas in first mandala (sookta 164) which speaks of 360

> > days and 360 nights in a year divided into 12 parts. Why this

> > Pratyakshya mening should be replaced with a Paroksha meaning of " cows "

> > is surprising !

> >

> > With Best Regards,

> >

> > -Vinay Jha

> > ============ ========= = =======

> >

> > ____________ _________ _________ __

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a@>

> > ancient_indian_ astrology; @ .

com; vedic_research_ institute; vedic astrology@ .

com; indiaarchaeology;

> > Thursday, June 11, 2009 5:25:13 AM

> > Fw: Re: [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in Vedic literature,

the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> >

> > --- On Wed, 6/10/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

wrote:

> >

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> > Re: [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in Vedic literature, the Relevant

Chronology and the Sidereal

> > WAVES-Vedic

> > Wednesday, June 10, 2009, 4:40 PM

> >

> > Dear Avinash Sathaye,

> >

> > Firstly you have forgotten that the main issue was whether the Rashis are

mentioned in the Vedic literature or not. There are some people who think thart

the Rashis are imported from the Greeks and that the Rashis are not mentioned in

the Vedic literature. Nobody seems to address this issue.. So I thought that it

would be good if I provide some information on that along with some

chronological information. I showed that Rashi is given in the Vedic literature.

Even a single mention of the Rashi is enough to dispel the doubt as to whether

Rashi is there in the Vedic literature or not. I have given the information and

it is upto the Vedic scholars to make their own assessment. Your mails are

already being circulated in some Internet Fora by the interested people who want

to show that the Rashis are not in the Vedic literature and you now you say :

> >

> > Quote

> >

> > I am not proposing the existence or absence of rashis in the Rigveda.

> >

> > Unquote

> >

> > It is written in the Mahabharata that before reading the Vedas one has to

read the Puranas and the Epics. This is because otherwise one can misunderstand

the Vedas. You want to interpret the Vedas by going straightway to the Vedas,

though that is against the advice that the Vedas are to be read only after

reading the Puranas. Further the Puranas have been given the status of fifth

Veda. I have also mentioned in my mail about the Brahma Rashi in Mahabharata and

how it became Makar Rashi in the Bhagavata purana. I expected you to see the

Bhagavata purana first if you are really a Vedic scholar. But you are avoiding

the Bhagavata purana, which mentions the Rashis most unambiguously. Bhagavata

purana has direct meanings so one cannot have any confusion about the meaning.

You do not want to admit that the Rashis are mentioned in the Bhagavata Purana.

Moreover you seem to have doubt about the the fact that the Vedic verse can have

more than one

> > meaning. If you want clearcut meaning then the Vedas are not for you as the

Vedas dislike the clearcut meaning. So unless one is very profficient in the

knowledge of the Vedas one can always question the meaning of the Vedic verse.

It is for this reason that in the ancient times the uninitiated were not allowed

to read the Vedas. One has to read the Vedangas before reading the Vedas and

that too under a good Vedic scholar. .

> >

> > If you consider my interpretations of the Vedic verses as assertions and

your interpretations as not assertions I have nothing to say.

> >

> > Sincerely,

> >

> > Sunl K. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > --- On Wed, 6/10/09, Avinash Sathaye <sohum@ edu> wrote:

> >

> > Avinash Sathaye <sohum@ edu>

> > Re: [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in Vedic literature, the Relevant

Chronology and the Sidereal

> > " Sunil Bhattacharjya " <sunil_bhattacharjy a @>

> > Wednesday, June 10, 2009, 9:46 AM

> >

> > Dear Sunil Bhattacharjya,

> >

> > I am not proposing the existence or absence of Rashis in the Rigveda.

> > All I am asking for is something besides just an assertion that they are

mentioned in the Rigveda.

> >

> > I will be quite happy to see a meaningful explanation of at least one of

your references in Rigveda which makes it appear as a reference to Rashis and

not what the traditional commentary stipulates.

> >

> > As you surely know, mImAMsakas made their method of interpretation as a

logical system with rules and deductions which can be consistently applied

everywhere. That way, even the people who do not agree with them cannot brush

them aside as just arbitrary interpreters. Yaska in his work also established

and applied rules illustrated with examples.

> >

> > I wish the believers in the parokSha meanings would do something comparable.

> >

> > At any rate, if you do not wish to explain further, I will not ask you any

further questions.

> >

> > Good luck with your future interpretations.

> >

> > P.S. I still don't understand why you do not mention the edition of the

Vedanga Jyotisha that you are getting your verses from.

> > Was that such an unreasonable request?

> >

> > Sunil Bhattacharjya wrote:

> >

> > I have given enough information. If you think that the Rashis are not

mentioned in the Vedic literature I have nothing to say. You live with your own

Vedic knowledge.

> >

> > Sincerely,

> >

> > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > --- On Tue, 6/9/09, Avinash Sathaye <sohum@ edu> wrote:

> >

> > Avinash Sathaye <sohum@ edu>

> > [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology

and the Sidereal

> > WAVES-Vedic

> > Tuesday, June 9, 2009, 4:25 AM

> >

> > I was happy to see more details from Sunil K. Bhattacharjya.

> > However, I still see many problems with the claim of Rashis in the Veda.

> > Here are my observations:

> >

> > SB said:

> > A) Rashi in Veda

> >

> > 1)

> > Rarshis are mentioned in the Veda. Rig Veda (RV) mentions Vrshabha (RV

6.47.5; 8.93.1),

> >

> > In 6.47.5 vRRiShabha is used as an adjective of Soma. sAyaNa explains it as

" vRRiSheTirjanayitA " - creator of rains, since offering of Soma leads to rains!

> > Could we have a parokSha explanation of the whole verse please!!

> > I have already given 8.93.1 in detail. My request to get a parokSha

explanation of it is still not resolved.

> >

> > SB further said:

> > Mithun (RV 3.39.3), Simha (RV 5.83.7; 9.89.3) and Kanya (RV 6.49.7).

> >

> > Of these, I quickly checked 6.49.7. There the word kanyA exists as an

adjective to the Goddess Saraswati.

> > Where does one get the Rashi?

> > sAyaNa describes as kanyA=kamanIyA.

> > Again, pleas give us a complete translation of the whole verse which

justifies the alternate meaning.

> > If one were to go by just the Rashi names appearing somewhere, then I can

find many more references in Rigveda(:-))

> >

> > SB further said;

> >

> > There is also mention of Kumbha (Rasi), where Agastya and Vasishtha were

born. The verse is :

> >

> >

> > Ordinarily Kumbha will mean a pot or kalash but we know that Agastya was

born from the womb of his mother haribhoo and not from a pot. So we understand

that Agastya was born in Kumbha Rashi. Here one has to interpret the metaphors

properly.

> >

> > Dr.Vartak pointed out the mention of Mesha, Vrischika and Dhanu Rashis in

Veda. He also identified Anas-Ratha with Tula Rashi and Shyena as Meena Rashi in

the Veda. I fully support Dr. Vartak's view as he knows that the Veda itself

says that it has Paroksha and Pratyaksha meaning of the verses.

> >

> > If, as Dr. Vartak and SB say this kumbha is a Rashi, then what is the

explanation of the rest?

> > The verse is mentioning Mitravaruna dropping equal amount of semen in the

kumbha and from it were born Agastya and Vasishtha.

> >

> > Could we have a parokSha translation of the whole mantra please? Without

that, we simply have to take the mention of Rashi as an assertion of faith

(perhaps in the great seer Dr. vartak?)

> >

> > SB frurther said:

> >

> > 2) Rashi in Vedanga Jyotisha

> >

> > Meena Rashi is clearly mentioned in the Vedanga Jyotisha (Yajur Vedanga

Jyotisha-verse 5). The verse is :

> >

> > Ye brihaspatina bhuktva MEENAN prabhriti rasayaH

> >

> > te hritaH panchabhiryataH yaH seshaH sa parigrihaH

> >

> > (Yajur Vedanga Jyotisha - sloka 5)

> > [

> > Here 'Meenan prabhriti RasayaH' means Meena and other Rashis. As Dr. Vartak

points out Meena was called Shyena in the Veda

> >

> > Please tell us what edition of VJ is this? I cannot locate this verse in my

copy at all. I wrote the fifth verse in mine already. I also gave the exact

reference to my source. Please reciprocate.

> > --

> >

> > With Best Regards,

> > Avinash Sathaye

> > (859)277-0130 (H) (859)257-8832 (O)

> > Web: www.msc.uky. edu/sohum

> >

> > --

> >

> > --

> > With Best Regards,

> > Avinash Sathaye

> >

> > Web: www.msc.uky. edu/sohum

> >

June 22, 2009

First admit that Kaul was wrong in telling that the Indians learnt astrology

from the Greeks.

Â

You do not know that Tapa is a Tropical month and want to argue. First find out

how many nakshatra are there isÂ Â in KrittikaÂ akshatra. Don't try to talk big

without knowing ABC of the subject.

khannaanup32 <khannaanup32

[vedic astrology] Re: Fw: Re: [WAVES-Vedic] Re:Rashi in

Vedic literature, the Relev

vedic astrology

Monday, June 22, 2009, 1:01 PM

SB,

< Third question is about Uttarayana occurring in Dhanistha Nakshatra. We all

know that Uttarayana occurs in a Nakshatra for one thousand years and it first

occurred in Dhanistha around 2400 BCE and then it ended around 1400 BCE. >

Read VEDAS, in it they have mentioned NKS of unequal divisions and same has been

taken up in VEDANAGA JYOTISH.

According to your own statement NKS have been mentioned as cluster of stars so

how it could be of equal divisions.BTW you need to read VEDAS first than should

jump in discussions.

Now come to the point.They were talking of DELPHI star to refer as point of

UTTARAYANA. so now count according to calculation based on 50 (as precession).

< Tapa as you very well know is the Tropical or Seasonal month starting at the

time of the Uttarayana. >

When something is starting from UTTARAYANA than how it could be sidereal. You

are really very funny!!!

< Yes, this clarification is needed from you.

Probably you will have to quote the definition of Lagna such as " Lagnanam udou

Surya " or whatever you think proper. Correct me if I am wrong. >

Is it mentioned in VEDANAGA JYOTISH or VEDAS??BTW some JYOTIHIS have told to

calculate lagna by MOON's movements just to make stories to defend point of

LAGNA.

< Now AKK has also a doubt about the Mrigachakra. He says that the " Bha-chakra "

means " Nakshatra-chakra " . He thinks " Mriga-chakra " should also be

" Nakshatra-chakra " . In my opinion the animal representaion is for the Rashi and

not Nakshatra. >

SB,i was not expecting that you will talk like this, he he he he,

here MRIGA, means MRIGASIRA NKS not DEER(HIRAN) means animal about which you are

thinking

--- On Mon, 22/6/09, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @> wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @>