Fw: [WAVES-Vedic] Fw: RE: Fwd: Rashi in Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

[Guest guest]

MY DEAR SB, who will forward this mail

 

Would you not like to take comments from others on this mail like you do

 

 

> --- On Wed, 24/6/09, kk.mehrotra

> <kk.mehrotra wrote:

>

>

> kk.mehrotra <kk.mehrotra

> [WAVES-Vedic] Fw: RE: [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd:

> Re: Rashi in Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology and

> the Sidereal

> WAVES-Vedic

> Wednesday, 24 June, 2009, 9:19 AM

>

>

> Dear Dr. Bhattacharjya,

> Pl. tell me what sidereal rashis are and how they are found

> in the puranas and which puranas.

> Is this quotaion for Vayu Purana any different from other

> Puranas, including Bhagawata Purana, which you call fifth

> Veda?

>

> I do not know Shri Anup Khanna. I am not a member of

> jyotisha groups and have no knowledge about his forwarding

> the mails. But I saw your mails at other sites and your

> mentioning " Kaul " infinite number of times, as if

> you are doing the japa of Narayana's name!

> I had requested you to let me know as to how the rashis

> that were " revealed " to you in a

> " parokshya " manneer could be different from the

> ones " revealed " to Dr. Wilkinson through his

> Tapasya and yoga. Either of you two is not having a complete

> " revelation " . But you chose not to answer that

> question.

> I had also requested you to give me the complete address of

> the website of INSA that gives the mantra from the Vedanga

> Jyotisha of Mina Rashi.

> You have not done that either.

>

> Since you are not answering my questions, I think you have

> chickened out, because you prefer only to answer those

> points that are convenient to you.

> Best wishes,

> K K Mehrotra

> WAVES-Vedic@

> . com, Sunil Bhattacharjya

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > Dear Shri Mehrotra,

> >  

> > See how your reply is being sent across to the

> other groups by the followers of Kaul, who does not

> accept the presence of the Sidereal Rashis in the Puranas

> inspite of my quoting the verses from the Vamana

> purana. Earlier the replies of Sathayae was similarly

> posted by Kaul himself to other groups and Sathaye did not

> object to that, to my knowledge. I ony wish that you should

> not have chickened out (or

> is it fretting or you do not have any reply?) and replied.

> We are discussing about the presence of Rashi in the ancient

> Indian Jyotish shastra and I do not think it wrong if more

> people come to know about our views.

> >  

> > Best wishes

> >  

> > Sunil KI. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > --- On Tue, 6/23/09, Anup Khanna <khannaanup32@

> ...> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Anup Khanna <khannaanup32@ ...>

> > RE: [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd: Re: Rashi in

> Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> > vedic astrology@

> . com

> > Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 11:42 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Dear Shri RishiRahulji,

> >  

> > You

> have talked about one word called as 'ARUDHA'.

> >  

> > So i will say only something that in the name of

> Jyotish whatever we have imported from others to India is

> totally corrupt and rubbish and holds no water.

> >  

> > Whatever have been originated in India in the field of

> astrology, it is great and nobody is even standing near of

> it.But there is so much mess now in this field, only very

> very very learned person can tell what is of ours origin and

> what is of others.

> >  

> > Indians mainly Hindu's contribution is really

> great in astrology and it is in the name of Naadi and it is

> free from Rashi.I am researcher in astrology so i think

> it is better to push away Rashi from Indian system.

> >  

> > THERE IS A STORY IN OUR SCRIPTURES THAT BY

> CHURNING IN SEA RAHU AND KETU CAME IN EXISTENCE, IT IS

> NOW HAVE BEEN PROVED AND VERIFIED BY SCIENTISTS AROUND THE

> WORLD RECENTLY IN THIS CENTURY.

> >

>  

> > SO I WILL SAY WE HINDU ARE GREAT AND WHATEVER HAVE

> BEEN ORIGINATED IN THE NAME ASTROLOGY IN INDIA IS

> UNPARALLELED.

> >  

> > WE ARE GREAT !

> >  

> > Thank you very much

> >

> > --- On Tue, 23/6/09, Rishi Rahul <rishirahul1961@

> hotmail.com> wrote:

> >

> > Rishi Rahul <rishirahul1961@ hotmail.com>

> > RE: [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd: Re: Rashi in

> Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> > " vedic astrology "

> <vedic astrology>

> > Tuesday, 23 June, 2009, 5:05 PM

> >

> > Are we seeing the Arudha concept working here?

> >

> > I wonder!!

> >

> > vedic astrology

> > khannaanup32@

> > Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:48:01 -0700

> > [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd: Re: Rashi in Vedic

> literature, the Relevant Chronology and

> the Sidereal

> >

> > WAVES-Vedic,

> " kk.mehrotra " <kk.mehrotra@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Shri Bhattacharjya,

> >

> > I have seen this mail on some other forums.

> >

> > Pl. note that I am not interested in my posts

> including or excluding your replies being forwarded to other

> forums. If I have to do so, I will do it myself.

> >

> > Now I can understand as to why people are reluctant to

> discuss things with you.

> >

> > Sincerely

> >

> > k. k. mehrotra

> >

> > WAVES-Vedic,

> sunil_bhattacharjya @ wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Dear Shri Mehrotra,

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > > Did you not yourself opine as follows;

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Quote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > ? " To me, he appears to be hardly a Vedic

> scholar "

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Unquote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Did you expect me to challenge your opinion and

> go all out to prove myself as a Vedic scholar? Vedas are too

> vast and it is not easy for one to call oneself as a Vedic

> scholar. I understand that many hold the view that even the

> great Sayanacharya had given the meanings more from the

> rituals point of view. I have written in mails what I knew

> about the Rashi in veda and Purana?and you opined that I am

> not a scholar. So I have no intention of changing your

> opinion on that.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > > You also said as follows "

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Quote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > " However, they always seem to me always

> converging on phalita-jyotisha being a Vedic science,as

> witnessed from your discussion in this and other

> forums "

> >

> > > ?

> >

>

> > > Unquote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Here I contest your views. For example, in the

> Advaita forum I have not talked about Astrology at all so

> far, as there was no need for that. Avtar Krishen Kaul sent

> some posts in some fora and I?contested his views and that

> made you to jump to the hasty conclusion made as above.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 3)

> >

> > > Now will you please tell me at least about

> yourself so that at least I can get know about your

> scholarship?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 4)

> >

> > > As regards the Vedas and the puranas and their

> chronology you are free to hold your own views. If you think

> that the Vedic words and the verses do not have any paroksha

> meaning it is upto you. I have quoted what the Brhadaranyaka

> Upanishad said. How do you say that I alone?hold about the

> Paroksha meaning of the Vedic verses? You took the name of

> Swami Dayanand

> Saraswati. Ask him about it and report to the forum. He

> may remove your doubts.

> >

> > > You have not read Dr. N.R.Joshi's mail

> carefully. He mentions about the seven layers of meanings?of

> the Vedic words and verses.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 5)

> >

> > > If you come to the conclusion that the Puranas

> are zero-veda then that is your opinion. BTW do you know

> what are the five criteria to be met by the Puranas?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 6)

> >

> > > I have given that date of the Bhagavata purana

> and this purana mentions the Rashis. About the date of the

> earliest date of the RigVeda I concur with the findings of

> Dr. Narahari Achar.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Sincerely,

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Sunil K..Bhattacharjya?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 6/19/09, kk.mehrotra

> <kk.mehrotra@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > kk.mehrotra <kk.mehrotra@ >

> >

> > > [WAVES-Vedic] Re: Rashi in Vedic

> literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> >

> > > WAVES-Vedic

> >

> > > Friday, June 19, 2009, 12:25 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Dear Shri Bhattacharjya,

> >

> > > If you are not a Vedic scholar, I do not know how

> you can claim to know " parokshya " meaning of the

> Vedic mantras when actually you say yourself that you do not

> have " pratakshya " knowledge of the Vedas either.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I do not know about Mr. Sathaye, but I am

> impressed to see your varied

> interests. However, they seem to me always converging on

> phalita-jyotisha being a Vedic science, as witnessed from

> your discussions in this and other forums. That is why I

> said that you were trying to pass astrology on the shoulders

> of the Vedas.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your statements that some Upanishadas talk of the

> Puranas etc. also makes me feel that Dayananda Saraswati was

> correct when he had said that there had been tamperings with

> the puranas and even some Vedic parts. If the Itihasas and

> Puranas came after the Vedas, how could the Vedas advise us

> that the Puranas and itihasas were the fifth Veda! Besides,

> if we have to study ithasas and Puranas before the Vedas,

> then they could be called Zero-Veda and not the fifth Veda!

> >

> > >

> >

> > > It has been pointed out by Dr. N. R. Joshi that

> Yaska and several other Acharyas etc. have not given any

> " parokshya " meanings of the mantras, the way you

> have

> done. I wonder why you alone have been chosen as an

> exception for such " hidden " meanings!

> >

> > > I also saw a lot of your correspondence with Dr.

> Wilkinson in this forum where he claims that he had seen

> Tropical zodiac in the Vedas through his yoga and tapasya

> and wanted the Hindus to celebrate Makar Sankranti on the

> Winter Solstice. Is it the same zodiac that you claim to

> have " parokshya " knowledge about from the Vedas or

> is it some other zodiac?

> >

> > > Regarding Vedanga Jyotisha, since I have no

> knowldge of that work, pl. give me the complete address of

> the website where it is available. I could not find it on

> INSA site.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > About Rashis in Bhagawata Purana etc., there is

> again a lot of material avaialbe in your discussions in

> other forums. Nobody is denying that there are rashis in the

> Puranas. But how does that prove that those rashis have been

> taken from the Vedas, and they are

> not interpolations from other sources, espedially when the

> Rashis are supposed to be " paroskhya " in the

> Vedas.

> >

> > > Can you pl. give the dates of various puranas and

> the Vedas as well Upanishadas according to you so that I

> could understand as to whether it was the puranas that

> talked about the Vedas or it was the other way round.

> >

> > > It is my humble request that there is nothing

> personal in this discussion but just an exchange of views. I

> want to improve my own knowledge.

> >

> > > With regaqrds,

> >

> > > Yours sincerely,

> >

> > > K K Mehrotra

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > WAVES-Vedic,

> sunil_bhattacharjya . wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Dear Mehrotraji,

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I agree with you that I appear to be

> hardly?a Vedic

> scholar. But your assumption that I am an astrologer is

> also not correct. I am a retired scientist and with interest

> in Ancient Indian History, Indian Philosophy and the Jyotish

> Shastra, which includes Hindu Astronomy?and Hindu

> Astrology.. In the WAVES-Vedic forum itself there may be

> some Vedic scholars and I hope they will express their views

> sooner or later.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I wish to clarify that you are mistaken to

> assume that I am insisting that you must accept my

> interpretations of the Vedic Mantras. I have just given my

> views. To accept or not is at your discretion. I am also not

> trying to pass astrology on the shoulders of the Vedas. It

> is upto?you to accept or not what I said but please do not

> be judgemental like that.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Avinash Sathayeji says as follows:

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Quote

> >

> > > > ?

> >

>

> > > > I have given up on Sunilji because he wants

> us to accept two axioms:

> >

> > > > 1. Vedas have a hidden meaning.

> >

> > > > 2. Only special people are entitled to this

> meaning and these people are not responsible to explain even

> a whole Richa, let alone a Sukta based on their view.

> >

> > > > We have to simply accept their declaration

> as the true truth!

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Unquote

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I am shocked?by the accuasations from Dr.

> Sathaye saying that he is put off by my two axioms.? I just?

> simply told him that the Vedic words and the verses have

> Paroksha and Pratyaksha meanings. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

> (4.2.2) says?:? " paroksha priya hi devaah pratyaksha

> dvishah " , which means that the gods love the indirect

> or obscure meanings? and dislikes the evident or

> obvious.?Let him not accept that if he

> likes.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I do not claim myself to be an authority on

> the Veda. But?I understand that for proper comprehension of

> the Vedic verses one must read the Puranas first and then

> one must also know the Vyakarana, Nirukta and?Chanda etc. If

> this requirement makes someone special then it is so.?He

> does not have to accept my firm?interpretation .

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > He has not told me whether he could find the

> verse on Rashi in the Vedanga Jyotisha. I wrote to?him that

> the INSA's?publication on?the " Vedanga

> Jyotisha " is available in the Internet and one can have

> access to it in?five. minutes.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > He has also not given any feedback whether

> he could see the Rashi in the Bhagavata Purana.. Recently

> Parameshwaranji sent a mail to the USBrahmins forum with the

> verses (with rashis mentioned in them) from the Vamana

> Purana .

> >

>

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > He just wants only to extract information

> and criticize unnecessarily.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > ?Sincerely,

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya?

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > --- On Wed, 6/17/09, K K Mehrotra

> <kk.mehrotra@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > K K Mehrotra <kk.mehrotra@ ...>

> >

> > > > [WAVES-Vedic] Re: Rashi in Vedic

> literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> >

> > > > " Avinash Sathaye "

> <sohum@>

> >

> > > > Cc: waves-vedic

> >

> > > > Wednesday, June 17, 2009, 12:31 AM

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Dear Sathayeji,

> >

> > > > I was under the impression that I had posted

> my mail to the WAVES-VEDIC forum.? On seeing your response,

> I checked the reason and? find that the mail reaches, by

> default, to the person concerned instead of the forum!? This

> happens only with WAVES!

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > I also find Shri Bhattacharjya' s

> insistence that we must accept only his interpretations of

> the Vedic mantras a bit difficult to digest.? To me, he

> appears to be hardly a Vedic scholar, though he poses to be

> one. He is more of an astrologer than anything else, who is

> trying to pass astrology on the shoulders of the Vedas.

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> > > > I do not know much about Aurobindo but I

> have read Dayananda Saraawati's Bhashya of the Vedas.? I

> am not an Arya Samaji, but I agree with almost all of his

> interpretations. ? I wish I coiuld understand Sayana

> Bhashya, since I do not have much knowledge of Sanskrit.

> >

> > > > Anyway, many thanks for the prompt reply.

> >

> > > > K. K. Mehrotra

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > --- On Tue, 6/16/09, Avinash Sathaye

> <sohum@ edu> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Avinash Sathaye <sohum@ edu>

> >

> > > > Re: Rashi in Vedic literature, the

> Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> >

> > > > " kk.mehrotra " <kk.mehrotra@

> >

> >

> > > > Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 3:43 PM

> >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Dear Malhotraji,

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Thank you for agreeing with me.

> >

> > > > I have given up on Sunilji because he wants

> us to accept two axioms:

> >

> > > > 1. Vedas have a hidden meaning.

> >

> > > > 2. Only special people are entitled to this

> meaning and these people are not responsible to explain even

> a whole Richa, let alone a Sukta based on their view.

> >

> > > > We have to simply accept their declaration

> as the true truth!

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > In other words, any argument with SB is

> likely to produce anything useful or rational.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > This is the reason I have decide not to

> waste my time on this discussion. If one of these seers were

> to describe their methodology, their full

> understaanding of their alternate meaning on a rational

> basis, then I am very interested.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Aravind had his spiritual interpretation and

> did write down extensive commentaries. While I don't

> always agree with his twist on the Vedic meanings, I respect

> his intellectual honesty and overall view.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Once again, thank you.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > kk.mehrotra wrote:

> >

> > > > Respected members,

> >

> > > > I am a new comer to this forum..

> >

> > > > This discussion of Rashis in the Vedas is

> quite interesting and is going on in several forums, where I

> have seen on Shri Bhattacharjya' s responses without any

> mail from Shri Sathaye.

> >

> > > > I am in full agreement with Avinashji's

> interpretations. It can hardly be presumed that Vasishtha

> and Vishwamitra etc. Rishis

> indulged in horoscope reading or match-making!

> >

> > > > Best wishes

> >

> > > > K K Mehrotra

> >

> > > > WAVES-Vedic,

> Avinash Sathaye <sohum@> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > 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 :

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > ????? ? ?????????? ?????? ?????? ????

> ???????? ????? |

> >

> > > > ??? ? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????

> ???????????? ???? || (RV 7.33.13)

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > 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

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > --- End

> forwarded message ---

> >

> > Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket

> website. Enter http://cricket.

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Why should anyone assume that I shall not reply to Mehrotra? Why should anyone

be impatient for my reply? He sent his mail to the WAVES-Vedic group so I should

send the reply to that group. Since Mr. Malhotra wants to learn certain things I

shall definitely teach him that. Nobody should worry about that. Mehrotra is

ignorant of certain facts of  the Hindu Jyotish Shastra and I shall definitely

oblige him to the best of my ability.  Mehrotra does not know that Kaul's

anti-astrology tirade is going on for more than two decades. I did not know that

Mehrotra gets disturbed by seeing Kaul's name a number of times (though

not infinitely as he says) . Does he not know that recently Kasab's name was

also appearing in the newspaper continuously?

 

He made sweeping comment about my Vedic knowkledge and then I asked him for his

own credentials. See now he had chickened out and not me. Let him tell  about

his own knowledge before commenting on other's knowledge. He only wants to learn

and at the same time poses as if he knows everything. If he knows everything

then let him tell what is what. What prevents him from telling what he knows

about the historicity of the Hindu Jyotish shastra? I told him what I know and

shall tell him more in reply to his fresh questions. Hindu tradition is that one

respects the person from whom one receives knowledge but Mehrotra does not

appear to belong to that tradition. I do  not pretend to know everything in the

world. If I do not know something I do not hesitate to admit.

 

Sincerely

 

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

 

 

 

--- On Wed, 6/24/09, Anup Khanna <khannaanup32 wrote:

 

 

Anup Khanna <khannaanup32

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

literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

vedic astrology

Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 8:41 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MY DEAR SB, who will forward this mail

 

Would you not like to take comments from others on this mail like you do

 

> --- On Wed, 24/6/09, kk.mehrotra

> <kk.mehrotra@ > wrote:

>

>

> kk.mehrotra <kk.mehrotra@ >

> [WAVES-Vedic] Fw: RE: [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd:

> Re: Rashi in Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology and

> the Sidereal

> WAVES-Vedic

> Wednesday, 24 June, 2009, 9:19 AM

>

>

> Dear Dr. Bhattacharjya,

> Pl. tell me what sidereal rashis are and how they are found

> in the puranas and which puranas.

> Is this quotaion for Vayu Purana any different from other

> Puranas, including Bhagawata Purana, which you call fifth

> Veda?

>

> I do not know Shri Anup Khanna. I am not a member of

> jyotisha groups and have no knowledge about his forwarding

> the mails. But I saw your mails at other sites and your

> mentioning " Kaul " infinite number of times, as if

> you are doing the japa of Narayana's name!

> I had requested you to let me know as to how the rashis

> that were " revealed " to you in a

> " parokshya " manneer could be different from the

> ones " revealed " to Dr. Wilkinson through his

> Tapasya and yoga. Either of you two is not having a complete

> " revelation " . But you chose not to answer that

> question.

> I had also requested you to give me the complete address of

> the website of INSA that gives the mantra from the Vedanga

> Jyotisha of Mina Rashi.

> You have not done that either.

>

> Since you are not answering my questions, I think you have

> chickened out, because you prefer only to answer those

> points that are convenient to you.

> Best wishes,

> K K Mehrotra

> WAVES-Vedic@

> . com, Sunil Bhattacharjya

> <sunil_bhattacharjy a wrote:

> >

> > Dear Shri Mehrotra,

> >  

> > See how your reply is being sent across to the

> other groups by the followers of Kaul, who does not

> accept the presence of the Sidereal Rashis in the Puranas

> inspite of my quoting the verses from the Vamana

> purana. Earlier the replies of Sathayae was similarly

> posted by Kaul himself to other groups and Sathaye did not

> object to that, to my knowledge. I ony wish that you should

> not have chickened out (or

> is it fretting or you do not have any reply?) and replied.

> We are discussing about the presence of Rashi in the ancient

> Indian Jyotish shastra and I do not think it wrong if more

> people come to know about our views.

> >  

> > Best wishes

> >  

> > Sunil KI. Bhattacharjya

> >

> > --- On Tue, 6/23/09, Anup Khanna <khannaanup32@

> ...> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Anup Khanna <khannaanup32@ ...>

> > RE: [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd: Re: Rashi in

> Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> > vedic astrology@

> . com

> > Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 11:42 AM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Dear Shri RishiRahulji,

> >  

> > You

> have talked about one word called as 'ARUDHA'.

> >  

> > So i will say only something that in the name of

> Jyotish whatever we have imported from others to India is

> totally corrupt and rubbish and holds no water.

> >  

> > Whatever have been originated in India in the field of

> astrology, it is great and nobody is even standing near of

> it.But there is so much mess now in this field, only very

> very very learned person can tell what is of ours origin and

> what is of others.

> >  

> > Indians mainly Hindu's contribution is really

> great in astrology and it is in the name of Naadi and it is

> free from Rashi.I am researcher in astrology so i think

> it is better to push away Rashi from Indian system.

> >  

> > THERE IS A STORY IN OUR SCRIPTURES THAT BY

> CHURNING IN SEA RAHU AND KETU CAME IN EXISTENCE, IT IS

> NOW HAVE BEEN PROVED AND VERIFIED BY SCIENTISTS AROUND THE

> WORLD RECENTLY IN THIS CENTURY.

> >

>  

> > SO I WILL SAY WE HINDU ARE GREAT AND WHATEVER HAVE

> BEEN ORIGINATED IN THE NAME ASTROLOGY IN INDIA IS

> UNPARALLELED.

> >  

> > WE ARE GREAT !

> >  

> > Thank you very much

> >

> > --- On Tue, 23/6/09, Rishi Rahul <rishirahul1961@

> hotmail.com> wrote:

> >

> > Rishi Rahul <rishirahul1961@ hotmail.com>

> > RE: [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd: Re: Rashi in

> Vedic literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> > " vedic astrology "

> <vedic astrology>

> > Tuesday, 23 June, 2009, 5:05 PM

> >

> > Are we seeing the Arudha concept working here?

> >

> > I wonder!!

> >

> > vedic astrology

> > khannaanup32@

> > Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:48:01 -0700

> > [vedic astrology] Re: Fwd: Re: Rashi in Vedic

> literature, the Relevant Chronology and

> the Sidereal

> >

> > WAVES-Vedic,

> " kk.mehrotra " <kk.mehrotra@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Shri Bhattacharjya,

> >

> > I have seen this mail on some other forums.

> >

> > Pl. note that I am not interested in my posts

> including or excluding your replies being forwarded to other

> forums. If I have to do so, I will do it myself.

> >

> > Now I can understand as to why people are reluctant to

> discuss things with you.

> >

> > Sincerely

> >

> > k. k. mehrotra

> >

> > WAVES-Vedic,

> sunil_bhattacharjya @ wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Dear Shri Mehrotra,

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 1)

> >

> > > Did you not yourself opine as follows;

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Quote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > ? " To me, he appears to be hardly a Vedic

> scholar "

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Unquote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Did you expect me to challenge your opinion and

> go all out to prove myself as a Vedic scholar? Vedas are too

> vast and it is not easy for one to call oneself as a Vedic

> scholar. I understand that many hold the view that even the

> great Sayanacharya had given the meanings more from the

> rituals point of view. I have written in mails what I knew

> about the Rashi in veda and Purana?and you opined that I am

> not a scholar. So I have no intention of changing your

> opinion on that.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 2)

> >

> > > You also said as follows "

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Quote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > " However, they always seem to me always

> converging on phalita-jyotisha being a Vedic science,as

> witnessed from your discussion in this and other

> forums "

> >

> > > ?

> >

>

> > > Unquote

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Here I contest your views. For example, in the

> Advaita forum I have not talked about Astrology at all so

> far, as there was no need for that. Avtar Krishen Kaul sent

> some posts in some fora and I?contested his views and that

> made you to jump to the hasty conclusion made as above.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 3)

> >

> > > Now will you please tell me at least about

> yourself so that at least I can get know about your

> scholarship?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 4)

> >

> > > As regards the Vedas and the puranas and their

> chronology you are free to hold your own views. If you think

> that the Vedic words and the verses do not have any paroksha

> meaning it is upto you. I have quoted what the Brhadaranyaka

> Upanishad said. How do you say that I alone?hold about the

> Paroksha meaning of the Vedic verses? You took the name of

> Swami Dayanand

> Saraswati. Ask him about it and report to the forum. He

> may remove your doubts.

> >

> > > You have not read Dr. N.R.Joshi's mail

> carefully. He mentions about the seven layers of meanings?of

> the Vedic words and verses.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 5)

> >

> > > If you come to the conclusion that the Puranas

> are zero-veda then that is your opinion. BTW do you know

> what are the five criteria to be met by the Puranas?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > 6)

> >

> > > I have given that date of the Bhagavata purana

> and this purana mentions the Rashis. About the date of the

> earliest date of the RigVeda I concur with the findings of

> Dr. Narahari Achar.

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Sincerely,

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > Sunil K..Bhattacharjya?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > > ?

> >

> > >

> >

> > > --- On Fri, 6/19/09, kk.mehrotra

> <kk.mehrotra@ > wrote:

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > kk.mehrotra <kk.mehrotra@ >

> >

> > > [WAVES-Vedic] Re: Rashi in Vedic

> literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> >

> > > WAVES-Vedic

> >

> > > Friday, June 19, 2009, 12:25 PM

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Dear Shri Bhattacharjya,

> >

> > > If you are not a Vedic scholar, I do not know how

> you can claim to know " parokshya " meaning of the

> Vedic mantras when actually you say yourself that you do not

> have " pratakshya " knowledge of the Vedas either.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > I do not know about Mr. Sathaye, but I am

> impressed to see your varied

> interests. However, they seem to me always converging on

> phalita-jyotisha being a Vedic science, as witnessed from

> your discussions in this and other forums. That is why I

> said that you were trying to pass astrology on the shoulders

> of the Vedas.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > Your statements that some Upanishadas talk of the

> Puranas etc. also makes me feel that Dayananda Saraswati was

> correct when he had said that there had been tamperings with

> the puranas and even some Vedic parts. If the Itihasas and

> Puranas came after the Vedas, how could the Vedas advise us

> that the Puranas and itihasas were the fifth Veda! Besides,

> if we have to study ithasas and Puranas before the Vedas,

> then they could be called Zero-Veda and not the fifth Veda!

> >

> > >

> >

> > > It has been pointed out by Dr. N. R. Joshi that

> Yaska and several other Acharyas etc. have not given any

> " parokshya " meanings of the mantras, the way you

> have

> done. I wonder why you alone have been chosen as an

> exception for such " hidden " meanings!

> >

> > > I also saw a lot of your correspondence with Dr.

> Wilkinson in this forum where he claims that he had seen

> Tropical zodiac in the Vedas through his yoga and tapasya

> and wanted the Hindus to celebrate Makar Sankranti on the

> Winter Solstice. Is it the same zodiac that you claim to

> have " parokshya " knowledge about from the Vedas or

> is it some other zodiac?

> >

> > > Regarding Vedanga Jyotisha, since I have no

> knowldge of that work, pl. give me the complete address of

> the website where it is available. I could not find it on

> INSA site.

> >

> > >

> >

> > > About Rashis in Bhagawata Purana etc., there is

> again a lot of material avaialbe in your discussions in

> other forums. Nobody is denying that there are rashis in the

> Puranas. But how does that prove that those rashis have been

> taken from the Vedas, and they are

> not interpolations from other sources, espedially when the

> Rashis are supposed to be " paroskhya " in the

> Vedas.

> >

> > > Can you pl. give the dates of various puranas and

> the Vedas as well Upanishadas according to you so that I

> could understand as to whether it was the puranas that

> talked about the Vedas or it was the other way round.

> >

> > > It is my humble request that there is nothing

> personal in this discussion but just an exchange of views. I

> want to improve my own knowledge.

> >

> > > With regaqrds,

> >

> > > Yours sincerely,

> >

> > > K K Mehrotra

> >

> > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > WAVES-Vedic,

> sunil_bhattacharjya . wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Dear Mehrotraji,

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I agree with you that I appear to be

> hardly?a Vedic

> scholar. But your assumption that I am an astrologer is

> also not correct. I am a retired scientist and with interest

> in Ancient Indian History, Indian Philosophy and the Jyotish

> Shastra, which includes Hindu Astronomy?and Hindu

> Astrology.. In the WAVES-Vedic forum itself there may be

> some Vedic scholars and I hope they will express their views

> sooner or later.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I wish to clarify that you are mistaken to

> assume that I am insisting that you must accept my

> interpretations of the Vedic Mantras. I have just given my

> views. To accept or not is at your discretion. I am also not

> trying to pass astrology on the shoulders of the Vedas. It

> is upto?you to accept or not what I said but please do not

> be judgemental like that.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Avinash Sathayeji says as follows:

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Quote

> >

> > > > ?

> >

>

> > > > I have given up on Sunilji because he wants

> us to accept two axioms:

> >

> > > > 1. Vedas have a hidden meaning.

> >

> > > > 2. Only special people are entitled to this

> meaning and these people are not responsible to explain even

> a whole Richa, let alone a Sukta based on their view.

> >

> > > > We have to simply accept their declaration

> as the true truth!

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Unquote

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I am shocked?by the accuasations from Dr.

> Sathaye saying that he is put off by my two axioms.? I just?

> simply told him that the Vedic words and the verses have

> Paroksha and Pratyaksha meanings. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

> (4.2.2) says?:? " paroksha priya hi devaah pratyaksha

> dvishah " , which means that the gods love the indirect

> or obscure meanings? and dislikes the evident or

> obvious.?Let him not accept that if he

> likes.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > I do not claim myself to be an authority on

> the Veda. But?I understand that for proper comprehension of

> the Vedic verses one must read the Puranas first and then

> one must also know the Vyakarana, Nirukta and?Chanda etc. If

> this requirement makes someone special then it is so.?He

> does not have to accept my firm?interpretation .

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > He has not told me whether he could find the

> verse on Rashi in the Vedanga Jyotisha. I wrote to?him that

> the INSA's?publication on?the " Vedanga

> Jyotisha " is available in the Internet and one can have

> access to it in?five. minutes.

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > He has also not given any feedback whether

> he could see the Rashi in the Bhagavata Purana.. Recently

> Parameshwaranji sent a mail to the USBrahmins forum with the

> verses (with rashis mentioned in them) from the Vamana

> Purana .

> >

>

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > He just wants only to extract information

> and criticize unnecessarily.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > ?Sincerely,

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > > Sunil K. Bhattacharjya?

> >

> > > > ?

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > --- On Wed, 6/17/09, K K Mehrotra

> <kk.mehrotra@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > K K Mehrotra <kk.mehrotra@ ...>

> >

> > > > [WAVES-Vedic] Re: Rashi in Vedic

> literature, the Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> >

> > > > " Avinash Sathaye "

> <sohum@>

> >

> > > > Cc: waves-vedic

> >

> > > > Wednesday, June 17, 2009, 12:31 AM

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Dear Sathayeji,

> >

> > > > I was under the impression that I had posted

> my mail to the WAVES-VEDIC forum.? On seeing your response,

> I checked the reason and? find that the mail reaches, by

> default, to the person concerned instead of the forum!? This

> happens only with WAVES!

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > I also find Shri Bhattacharjya' s

> insistence that we must accept only his interpretations of

> the Vedic mantras a bit difficult to digest.? To me, he

> appears to be hardly a Vedic scholar, though he poses to be

> one. He is more of an astrologer than anything else, who is

> trying to pass astrology on the shoulders of the Vedas.

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> > > > I do not know much about Aurobindo but I

> have read Dayananda Saraawati's Bhashya of the Vedas.? I

> am not an Arya Samaji, but I agree with almost all of his

> interpretations. ? I wish I coiuld understand Sayana

> Bhashya, since I do not have much knowledge of Sanskrit.

> >

> > > > Anyway, many thanks for the prompt reply.

> >

> > > > K. K. Mehrotra

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > --- On Tue, 6/16/09, Avinash Sathaye

> <sohum@ edu> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Avinash Sathaye <sohum@ edu>

> >

> > > > Re: Rashi in Vedic literature, the

> Relevant Chronology and the Sidereal

> >

> > > > " kk.mehrotra " <kk.mehrotra@

> >

> >

> > > > Tuesday, June 16, 2009, 3:43 PM

> >

> >

> > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Dear Malhotraji,

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Thank you for agreeing with me.

> >

> > > > I have given up on Sunilji because he wants

> us to accept two axioms:

> >

> > > > 1. Vedas have a hidden meaning.

> >

> > > > 2. Only special people are entitled to this

> meaning and these people are not responsible to explain even

> a whole Richa, let alone a Sukta based on their view.

> >

> > > > We have to simply accept their declaration

> as the true truth!

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > In other words, any argument with SB is

> likely to produce anything useful or rational.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > This is the reason I have decide not to

> waste my time on this discussion. If one of these seers were

> to describe their methodology, their full

> understaanding of their alternate meaning on a rational

> basis, then I am very interested.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Aravind had his spiritual interpretation and

> did write down extensive commentaries. While I don't

> always agree with his twist on the Vedic meanings, I respect

> his intellectual honesty and overall view.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > Once again, thank you.

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > kk.mehrotra wrote:

> >

> > > > Respected members,

> >

> > > > I am a new comer to this forum..

> >

> > > > This discussion of Rashis in the Vedas is

> quite interesting and is going on in several forums, where I

> have seen on Shri Bhattacharjya' s responses without any

> mail from Shri Sathaye.

> >

> > > > I am in full agreement with Avinashji's

> interpretations. It can hardly be presumed that Vasishtha

> and Vishwamitra etc. Rishis

> indulged in horoscope reading or match-making!

> >

> > > > Best wishes

> >

> > > > K K Mehrotra

> >

> > > > WAVES-Vedic,

> Avinash Sathaye <sohum@> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > 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 :

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > ????? ? ?????????? ?????? ?????? ????

> ???????? ????? |

> >

> > > > ??? ? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????

> ???????????? ???? || (RV 7.33.13)

> >

> > > >

> >

> > > > 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

> >

> > > >

> >

> > >

> >

> > --- End

> forwarded message ---

> >

> > Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket

> website. Enter http://cricket.

> >

> >