Mark,

Good points.

I am sort of a neo-platonist, pythagorean, taoist, sufi, eremite, hasidic, samkhyan, advaitan, shraman, siderealist/tropicalist/lunar nakshatra astrologer and some other things. Probably insane as well.

I think I said all that I felt the need to say on this forum by now.

cheers

p.s.

The post I made at the bottom of the previous page might be more relevant to astrologers than this post. I should mention it because it may not be seen otherwise.

It was a proposition to all astrologers.

It isn't that we would all need to become experts in every aspect of astrology but if all charts were made in the inclusive proposed way, it seems like it would go a long way towards harmony and protection and such.

That proposed chart format wouldn't take into account all of the various techniques and schools of astrology, but the basics would be covered, I think.

From a book accessible on the website at the start of this thread:

"The years of Jupiter take their names from the several nakshatras in which he reappears after his conjunction with the Sun; and these names are identical with the names of the lunar months" (Brihat Samhita VII.1).

There is also a wealth of information on how to read eclipses in this text.

Here is another list of years called Samvatsaras: 60 calendar years. I have no idea where this list was found or when the start of these years begins. In my notes I wrote 12 samvatsaras=1 cycle of Jupiter; 30 samvatsaras=1 cycle of Saturn.

The order of this list changed from the original, it is noted in my notes.

1 (old #35 year). Prabhava (1987-88)
2. Vibhava
3. Shukla
4. Pramoda
5. Prajapati
6. Angirasa
7. Shrimukha
8. Bhava
9. Yuva
10. Dhatri
11. Ishvara
12. Bahudhanya
13. Pramadhi
14. Vikrama
15. Vrisha
16. Chitrabhanu
17. Svabhanu
18. Tarana
19. Parthiva
20. Vyaya
21. Sarvajeeth
22. Sarvadhari
23. Virodhi
24. Vikrita
25. Khara (2011-12)
26 (This used to be #60). Nandana
27(This used to be #1). Vijaya
28. Jaya
29. Manmadha
30. Durmukhi
31. Hevilambi
32. Vilambi
33. Vikari
34. Sharvari
35. Plava
36. Shubhakruti
37. Sobhakruthi
38. Krodhi
39. Vishvavasu
40. Parabhava
41. Plavanga
42. Kilaka
43. Saumya
44. Sadharana
45. Virodhikruthi
46. Paridhavi
47. Pramadicha
48. Ananda
49. Rakshasa
50. Anala
51. Pingala
52. Kalayukthi
53. Siddharthi
54. Raudra
55. Durmathi
56. Dundubhi
57. Rudhirodgari
58. Raktakshi
59. Krodhana (1985-86)
60. Akshaya (1986-87)

Note: I don't yet know if these years are connected with the Jupiter section in the Brihat Samhita.

It is not in agreement with some older Hindu scholars that Zeta Piscium is the star referred to in the old literature as Revati. Some Hindu scholars believe that Revati was a different star which is no longer visible and it was placed on the ecliptic.

"One should perform the sraddha ceremony on the Makara-sankranti or on the Karkata-sankranti. One should also perform this ceremony on the Mesa-sankranti day and the Tula-sankranti day, in the yoga named Vyatipata, on that day in which three lunar tithis are conjoined, during an eclipse of either the moon or the sun, on the 12th lunar day, and in the Sravana naksatra. One should perform this ceremony on the Aksaya-triya day, on the ninth lunar day of the bright fortnight of the month of Kartika, on the four astakas in the winter season and cool season, on the seventh lunar day of the bright fortnight of the month of magha naksatra and the full moon day, and on the days when the moon is completely full, or not quite completely full, when these days are conjoined with the naksatras from which the names of certain months are derived. One should also perform the sraddha ceremony on the 12th lunar day when it is in conjunction with any of the naksatras named Anuradha, Sravana, Uttara phalguni, Uttarasadha, or Uttara bhadrapada. Again, one should perform this ceremony when the eleventh lunar day is in conjunction with either Uttara phalguin, Uttarasadha, or Uttara bhadrapada. Finally, one should perform this ceremony on days conjoined with one's own birth star [janma naksatra] or with Sravana naksatra" (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.14.20-23).

From the above paragraph one can see that one would need to either be an expert astronomer or astrologer, or know one, to know when to perform certain religious ceremonies in Hinduism. "For example, in the Surya siddhanta the Vyatipata yoga is defined as the time when 'the moon and sun are in different ayanas, the sum of their longitude is equal to 6 signs (nearly) and their declinations are equal" (Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy by Richard Thompson). This example of the timing of ceremonies may shed some light on certain statements made in the Manusmriti.

"We would suggest that the dating of the start of Kali yuga at 3102 b.c. is based on actual historical accounts, and that the tradition of an unusual alignment of the planets at this time is also a matter of historical fact. The opinion of modern scholars is that the epoch of Kali yuga was concocted during the early medieval period. According to this hypothesis, Indian astronomy used borrowed Greek astronomy to determine that a near planetary alignment occurred in 3102 b.c. After performing the laborious calculations needed to discover this, they then invented the fictitious era of Kali yuga and convinced the entire subcontinent of India that this era had been going on for some three thousand years. Subsequently, many different Puranas were written in accordance with this chronology, and people all over India became convinced that these works, although unknown to their forefathers, were really thousands of years old.

One might ask why anyone would even think of searching for astronomical alignments over a period of thousands of years into the past and then redefining the history of an entire civilization on the basis of a particular discovered alignment. It seems more plausible to suppose that the story of Kali yuga is genuine, that the alignment occurring at its start is a matter of historical recollection, and that the Puranas really were written prior to the beginning of this era" (Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy by Richard Thompson).

Although my studies of astrology are in their infancy, my knowledge of human nature is not. Cui bono is the question here. Why would Indians go through the trouble of creating fictitious past dates and history of their civilization? Why would western contemporary scholars ignore their claims?

The answer to the second question is very simple: ethnocentrism.

The Library of Alexandria was destroyed, and so the West was left with comparatively recent scraps of writings from history. Western scholars approached Indology with their limited preconceptions and with ethnocentrism.

How did Indians know the diameter of the planets? They did know them.

The Surya siddhanta give close to exact diameters, according to modern measurements of the moon, mercury, earth, mars, and saturn. The figures for venus and jupiter are halved and so it could have been a later transcriber error with those two concerning radius and diameter. The sun diameter is off as well.

This is a fascinating study.

Dear Varuna:

"One should perform the sraddha ceremony on the Makara-sankranti or on the Karkata-sankranti. One should also perform this ceremony on the Mesa-sankranti day and the Tula-sankranti day, ..." " (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.14.20-23).

(For those who do not understand the Sanskrit terms: Samkranti means "ingress". The quotation is about ingresses of the Sun into sidereal Capricorn, Cancer, Aries, and Libra. Shraddha is a ceremony in honour of dead relatives.)

Varuna, what translation do you quote? It is wrong! Completely misleading!
I looked into the Sanskrit text. You should read the Gita Press translation, which is more correct:

"He should (similarly) perform their ?r?ddha at the time oft he summer and winter solstices and vernal and autumnal equinoxes; during the particular (seventeenth) astronomical division of time called Vyatp?ta..."

The Sanskrit version is:
ayane vi?uve kury?d vyat?p?te dinak?aye
A litteral translation of this very concise text would be:
"At the solstice, at the equinox one should perform (it), in Vyat?p?ta(yoga), in the evening,..."

This instruction does not refer to sidereal but to tropical celestial events.

This example of the timing of ceremonies may shed some light on certain statements made in the Manusmriti.

I agree, it shows an example of what real Vedic astrologers did and what kind of astrology is accepted in the Vedic writings.

"We would suggest that the dating of the start of Kali yuga at 3102 b.c. is based on actual historical accounts, and that the tradition of an unusual alignment of the planets at this time is also a matter of historical fact. The opinion of modern scholars is that the epoch of Kali yuga was concocted during the early medieval period. According to this hypothesis, Indian astronomy used borrowed Greek astronomy to determine that a near planetary alignment occurred in 3102 b.c. After performing the laborious calculations needed to discover this, they then invented the fictitious era of Kali yuga and convinced the entire subcontinent of India that this era had been going on for some three thousand years. Subsequently, many different Puranas were written in accordance with this chronology, and people all over India became convinced that these works, although unknown to their forefathers, were really thousands of years old.
One might ask why anyone would even think of searching for astronomical alignments over a period of thousands of years into the past and then redefining the history of an entire civilization on the basis of a particular discovered alignment.
It seems more plausible to suppose that the story of Kali yuga is genuine, that the alignment occurring at its start is a matter of historical recollection, and that the Puranas really were written prior to the beginning of this era" (Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy by Richard Thompson).

Richard Thompson is wrong.
I tried to explain it in my article. Ancient Indian planetary theories just worked like this. It was assumed that all planets meet in one celestial point at the beginning and end of a huge period of time (yuga or kalpa). You certainly are familiar with the concept of pralaya (dissolution of everything) in Hindu cosmology. At the time of pralaya all planets meet in a great conjunction. Ancient Hindu planetary theories always give the number of cycles for each planet between two such planetary pralayas where all planets return to their initial point. Knowing these numbers of cycles and the date of the last planetary pralaya, one can calculate the current positions of the planets. Now, as for this kind of ephemeris calculations an initial point is required, they had to "reconstruct" one, and they chose Feb. 17/18, 3102 BC.

Some more facts:
The oldest reference to the Kaliyuga era is found in Aryabhata around 500 AD.
The planetary theory of the Suryasiddhanta, as I described it above, gives best results around 500 AD with an increasing error for the more remote past and for more recent times. Thus, there can be hardly a doubt that the Kaliyuga era was invented only in late antiquity.

Perhaps you should have another look into my article and study its details.

Although my studies of astrology are in their infancy, my knowledge of human nature is not. Cui bono is the question here. Why would Indians go through the trouble of creating fictitious past dates and history of their civilization? Why would western contemporary scholars ignore their claims?
The answer to the second question is very simple: ethnocentrism.

Everytime I hear a Hindu talking about "ethnocentrism", I am a bit speechless... It seems that Hindus themselves are usually not aware that many Hindu scholars and pseudo-scholars try to prove at any price that their culture is the oldest and most spiritual of the whole world, actually the origin of all Human culture.
Of course I am aware that modern technology and science threatens to destroy ancient traditions and cultures, not only in India. I am also aware that some scientists of the 19th and early 20th centuries may have had a eurocentric or even Christian bias in their understanding of Hindu culture. But does this really apply to modern indologists and scientists? Where do Western scientists believe is the origin of their culture? In America or Europe? Rather in ancient Iraq, Egypt, and Palestine/Israel, which today are Muslim and Jewish countries. Where do they believe was the origin of all human beings? In America? In Europe? No, in Africa! Where do they believe is the origin of all Indo-European languages? In Europe? No, in Central Asia.
There is strong resistence among Hindu scholars against this kind of facts. They want India to be the origin of everything. And if it turned out that this is not the case, their whole belief systems would break down. For this reason, Hindu scholars often have a very biased view of their own sacred writings.

Dieter

Scientific truth is a provisional truth- it changes when a better evidence or explanation comes along to replace the previous one.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 63645.html

...Researchers analysed some six lakh bits of genetic information in the form of SNPs drawn from DNA of over 1,300 individuals from 112 populations including 30 ethnic groups in India.

The comparison of this data with genetic data of other populations showed that South Asia harbours two major ancestry components. One is spread in populations of South and West Asia, Middle East, Near East and the Caucasus. The second component is more restricted to South Asia and accounts for more than 50 per cent of the ancestry in Indian populations.

"Both the ancestry components that dominate genetic variation in South Asia demonstrate much greater diversity than those that predominate West Eurasia. This is indicative of a more ancient demographic history and a higher long-term effective population size underlying South Asian genome variation compared to that of West Eurasia," researchers said.

"The genetic component which spread beyond India is significantly higher in India than in any other part of world. This implies that this genetic component originated in India and then spread to West Asia and Caucasus," said Gyaneshwar Chaube of University of Tartu, Estonia.

If any migration from Central Asia to South Asia took place, the study says, it should have introduced apparent signals of East Asian ancestry into India. "Because this ancestry component is absent from the region, we have to conclude that if such an event indeed took place, it occurred before the East Asian ancestry component reached central Asia," it said.

So, I could be happy that I could not be one of the others and it could be mutual
PD

pankajdubey wrote:Scientific truth is a provisional truth- it changes when a better evidence or explanation comes along to replace the previous one.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 63645.html

A big triumph for indocentrists, it may seem.

But I think, your statement is quite true also for this study and the conclusions that are drawn from it.

Dieter

I own the book Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy by Richard Thompson.

I am afraid I concluded the author is a Vaishnavite fundamentalist determined to prove the inerrancy of the Vaishnavite scriptues in particular and Indian culture in general over anything else. He lacks any of the detachment necessary for serious scholarship. You dont need a knowledge of Sanskrit to spot that kind of blinkered approach.

Mark

Hi Dieter,

Welcome back.

I was not aware you were still following this thread, therefore I was not accusing you personally of ethnocentrism. It is very difficult not to be ethnocentric when one broadens the definition of the term, because ethnocentrism becomes the lenses we view the world through, and this necessarily includes our prior training and education. You are probably no more ethnocentric than I am. I was using the term ?ethnocentric? as a propaganda tool, to cause other people to doubt certain aspects of what is currently taught in some places, concerning things which I am interested in.

I have heard there are over 300 versions [-not translations] of the Ramayana, and so I would be surprised if there are not also many versions of the Srimad Bhagavatam as well. I believe the particular version I quoted is from the Swami Prabhupada translation, which consists of over 30 volumes.

I would like to demonstrate certain similarities in ancient teachings from wide-ranging geographical cultures. This does not necessarily prove they are referring to the same things, but it is strongly suggestive of such in some cases. It will also suggest to you that I am not one who looks on everything from India as superior and older than other things.

?Again there comes a humiliation, destruction, and demolition. The manikins, woodcarvings were killed when the Heart of Sky devised a flood for them. A great flood was made; it came down on the heads of the manikins, woodcarvings? (Popol Vuh Book 1).

?I will tell thee, Gilgamesh,
Of a mournful mystery of the Gods:
How once, having met together,
They resolved to flood the land of Shuruppak.
Clear-eyed Ea, saying nothing to his father, Anu,
Nor to the Lord, the great Enlil,
Nor to the spreader of happiness, Nemeru,
Nor even to the underworld prince, Enua,
Called to him his son Ubara-Tut;
Said to him: 'Build thyself a ship;
Take with thee thy near ones,
And what birds and beasts thou wilt;
Irrevocably have the Gods resolved
To flood the land of Shuruppak? (Gilgamesh 21).

?And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth? (Book of Genesis 7.6).


?And One Monkey and One Artisan were great flautists and singers, and as they grew up they went through great suffering and pain. It had cost them suffering to become great knowers? (Popol Vuh Book 1).

The above quote is a recurring sentiment in various cultures? ancient teachings concerning the path of seekers of knowledge.


?Thoughts came into existence and they gazed; their vision came all at once. Perfectly they saw, perfectly they knew everything under the sky, whenever they looked. The moment they turned around and looked around in the sky, on the earth, everything was seen without any obstruction. They didn?t have to walk around before they could see what was under the sky; they just stayed where they were? (Popol Vuh Book 4).

The above quote sounds strangely like Satya yuga.

?Yet they?ll become as great as gods, unless they procreate, proliferate at the sowing, the dawning, unless they increase?Their deeds would become equal to ours, just because their knowledge reaches so far?They were blinded as the face of a mirror is breathed upon?And such was the loss of the means of understanding, along with the means of knowing everything? (Popol Vuh Book 4).

?But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die?For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil?And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken? (Book of Genesis 2.17, 3.5 & 22-3).


??their language became differentiated. They could no longer understand one another clearly? (Popol Vuh Book 4).

?And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another?s speech? (Book of Genesis 11.6-7).


?The visible sun is not the real one? (Popol Vuh Book 4). This kind of statement is often found in Indian or Hindu literature as well.


?They were of just one mind: there was no evil for them, nor were there difficulties. Their reign was all in calm: there were no quarrels for them, and no disturbances. Their hearts were filled with a steady light: there was nothing of stupidity and nothing of envy in what they did. Their splendor was modest: they caused no amazement, nor had they grown great? (Popol Vuh Book 5).

?In the age when life on earth was full, no one paid any special attention to worthy men, nor did they single out the man of ability. Rulers were simply the highest branches on the tree, and the people were like deer in the woods. They were honest and righteous without realizing that they were ?doing their duty.? They loved each other and did not know that this was ?love of neighbor.? They deceived no one yet they did not know that they were ?men to be trusted.? They were reliable and did not know that this was ?good faith.? They lived freely together giving and taking, and did not know that they were generous. For this reason their deeds have not been narrated. They made no history? (Chuang tzu xii. 13).


The yugas are not unique to Indian or Hindu thought:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_Man

?The Mahanirvana Tantra (1.37-50) has more information to offer in this regard. It states that as dharma or religion and responsible duty are destroyed, Kali yuga will be an age of evil ways, customs, and deceit. The Vedas will be forgotten and the Puranas will be destroyed. The brahmanas, priests, and religious leaders will be without faith or devotion, averse to all austerities, deceitful, ignorant, and will neglect their own prayers or fail to chant the mantras?the Ganges River will be broken in some places and at others it will be diverted from its course? (The Vedic Prophecies by Stephen Knapp).

?The Srimad Bhagavatam starting at 12.3.18, states that in Satya yuga there is virtue, wisdom, and religion, with no ignorance or vice. These are the four legs of [dharma] religion and the universal aspects of pious life as found in any true spiritual process? (The Vedic Prophecies by Stephen Knapp).

The Lakota Native American tribe teaches of the Buffalo which stands on 4 legs and with the passing of each Age, one leg is lost [of dharma]. This does not demonstrate the superiority of Hindu or Indian thought, rather this suggests to me that some teachings are so hoary with age that the common root of these teachings makes Ptolemy look like a post-post-modern fellow.

?2:31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.

2:32 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,

2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.

2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.

2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

2:36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.

2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.

2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.

2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.

2:41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.

2:42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure? (Book of Daniel).

I would not call myself an Indocentric or ethnocentric student. I try to learn what I can from each tradition. It is true that I am more knowledgeable of some jyotish teachings concerning astrology, but that is because I approached astrology through jyotish vedanga. Prior to this I did not even know astrology consisted of more than one?s Sun sign.

The Vedanga Jyotish is found at the end of a Yajur Veda, therefore it is appropriate for jyotishis to link their astrology to the Vedas in my current world-view and understanding which is always subject to revision ? of such is the fate of seekers of knowledge.

There are so many anomalies in the archeological and anthropological record that entire books have been written on this topic; I have read a few of these books. I will not take quotes from them, because it would require this post to become excessively long and tedious. Current scholars hide the anomalies and ignore them, and many of them are probably not even aware of the existence of these anomalies because of unwillingness to read unorthodox texts. If historians would begin to review the anomalies, it would require an entire revision of their speculative theories of history. One example of this is the swastika found in Hopewell Native American mounds and in Hopi rock writings and various other places.

I agree with you that sometimes the Indian texts refer to Seasonal based (Tropical zodiac) phenomenon as well as nakshatra star-based information. I am not trying to pretend these seasonal based observations and ceremonial information do not exist in Indian texts. I would rather see Siderealists and Tropicalists work together. I would like for astrology programmers to consider adding one or two layers to the outside of basic natal charts in the manner in which was suggested in my last post on the previous page of this thread. There would be so much benefit from this, in my view.

I am on your side in not believing the oldest and most spiritual phenomenon is India. I believe the origins of the Egyptians and Sumerians are similarily as old, but the problem is the destruction of the Library of Alexandria, so this gives the appearance of such, when we listen to the puranas and the claims of Indians ? and this indeed gives the appearance of it being older.

If everything human has a common root then it doesn?t even make sense to proclaim one tribe to be older than another tribe. But some tribes kept their ancient teachings longer than other ones did.

I will reread your article again at some point.

I do not know how you can state with confidence that the oldest reference to kaliyuga is from Aryabhata. Based on my own studies, the kali yuga idea is far older than 500 a.d. and it is not unique to Hindu or Indian thought.

Om, shanti, shanti, shanti

Mark,

I agree with you that the book by Thompson is complete propaganda, it even admits it in the introduction. The value in it is that it mentions things you will never find in a typical Western written text on Indian astronomy trying to prove alternative Western biased viewpoints.

Quote from the very first text in the introduction of Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy:

"'Now our Ph.D.'s must collaborate and study the Fifth Canto to make a model for building the Vedic planetarium. My final decision is that the universe is just like a tree, with root upwards. Just as a tree has branches and leaves, so the universe is also composed of planets which are fixed up in the tree like the leaves, flowers, fruits, etc...So now all you Ph.D.s must carefully study the details of the Fifth Canto and make a working model of the universe. If we can explain the passing seasons, eclipses, phases of the moon, passing of day and night, etc., then it will be very powerful propaganda' (letter from Srila Prabhupada to Svarupa Damodara dasa, April 27, 1976)."

The difference between Richard Thompson, and other scholars, is that Thompson is forthright and honest about what he is doing. Every piece of scholarly work is ultimately propaganda at the end of the day. Maybe there is such a thing as objective criticism but I am not sure of this. Thompson wanted to give us propaganda to use against the post-modern Western propaganda.

The Western alternative theorists on Indian history are just as guilty of what you said Thompson is guilty of, but the Western alternative theorists try to hide it.

So who is worse, Thompson or the others?

pankajdubey,

Thank you for informing of that genetic study.

om indraya namaha

I am growing weary of trying to discuss and inform and learn jyotish from a different perspective, and having everyone tell me that their own views are more informed and correct than mine.

Everyone quotes second-hand knowledge as though it were the gospel truth. It seems like the only responses I get here are designed to eradicate my own viewpoints or submissions to the forum.

I do not plan on continuing at this forum.

I do not blame any one of you for this; I understand why and how this works. I certainly cannot claim to be innocent of this myself. It only teaches me one thing. Hermit is a more appealing life.

om

I am growing weary of trying to discuss and inform and learn jyotish from a different perspective, and having everyone tell me that their own views are more informed and correct than mine.

Everyone quotes second-hand knowledge as though it were the gospel truth. It seems like the only responses I get here are designed to eradicate my own viewpoints or submissions to the forum.

A forum is not a democracy in the sense that every opinion put forth is of equal value. Every member deserves a respectful response but some views may simply be incorrect or in fact total nonsense. Better informed people are inevitably going to challenge such views. Its good that they do as otherwise a thread could be very misleading to the public reading it. The idea of the intellectual dialectic is hopefully a way to refine our understanding. We need to have the detachment to see the difference between a criticism of a particular view and a personal attack. Of course sometimes forums do deteriorate that way. However, I dont think that has happened on this thread.

Here on this thread we have had two people: Martin and Dieter who are conversant in Sanskrit and highly knowledgeable on Indian astrology. They have studied much of the astrological literature. This doesn't make them infallible but it does mean they are coming to to this subject with a lot more knowledge than you or I are. Rather than see this as a threat and get hurt or resentful why not see this a valuable opportunity to learn?

I was certainly, amazed at Dieter's comment on the Kali Yuga. Fascinating! It makes me wonder if the Brahmins originally got this idea from the Shramana groups like the Buddhists and Jains as both have long taught the world was entering a very long period of moral decline after the passing away of their teachers. As I cited earlier there is some research suggesting Aryabhata was a Jain or at least influenced by Jain ideas.

Mark

Mark wrote:

A forum is not a democracy in the sense that every opinion put forth is of equal value. Every member deserves a respectful response but some views may simply be incorrect or in fact total nonsense. Better informed people are inevitably going to challenge such views. Its good that they do as otherwise a thread could be very misleading to the public reading it. The idea of the intellectual dialectic is hopefully a way to refine our understanding. We need to have the detachment to see the difference between a criticism of a particular view and a personal attack. Of course sometimes forums do deteriorate that way. However, I dont think that has happened on this thread.

Thank you. No one has attacked me personally; I don't feel that anyone has done this either. Dieter has been more than courteous with me, for example.

I agree that knowledge is not a democracy when it comes to 1+1=2. However, my concern about discussion and the appearance of "better informed people" is exactly the same as yours, that people can easily be misled and it would be good to straighten the matter out. The problem in my view, is that these "better informed people" have this title attached to their names and this gives their opinions more weight, thus the potential to be misled is far greater from them.

Let me give you an example: I once went to a university (i.e. a place where they teach you what to think, not how to think), to investigate whether I wanted to attend this school to learn Sanskrit. I was conversing with a professor who had a P.iled h.igh and D.eep degree as an Indologist. I mentioned that my goal was to learn Sanskrit and translate obscure texts from within India. He laughed at me and said something to the effect that most (or maybe he said all) of the important texts have already been translated. I walked out of that place and never went back. I didn't have any degrees and I knew more about the state of affairs than he did.

I also had a professor at another university who laughed at the mythology of India while he taught it, because it didn't fit his Western-trained, so-called rational, world views. It made me sad. There was not even an attempt to try and understand the other culture by immersing oneself into it and erasing one's own prejudices and feeling the vibe and living the myths from the POINT OF VIEW of Indians. I left that university as well, for more than one reason.

There is not one Indologist who can claim they know that the Kaliyuga is an invention from later years. Not one Indologist was present in bharata 5000 years ago. But innocent people will believe what they say about this. In this case, the "knowledge is not a democracy" statement does not apply. I have already presented evidence in a prior post which suggests that this later invention of the kaliyuga story just doesn't add up.

The idea of genetic manipulation of apes by aliens, is just as valid of a creation story as the theory of Darwin evolution. No one knows this either way. But people will listen to someone who has a P.iled h.igh and D.eep degree in biology. The potential for being misled is much greater in these kind of cases.

Mark wrote:

Here on this thread we have had two people: Martin and Dieter who are conversant in Sanskrit and highly knowledgeable on Indian astrology. They have studied much of the astrological literature. This doesn't make them infallible but it does mean they are coming to to this subject with a lot more knowledge than you or I are. Rather than see this as a threat and get hurt or resentful why not see this a valuable opportunity to learn?

Knowledge of a language does not give anyone a deeper insight into a culture. I know English but that doesn't mean I know the origins of Britain. One thing I have learned in my studies of numerous ancient texts from a wide range of cultures, is that one needs to purchase several translations and then compare them with each other. The translations are so varied. For example, purchase 10 copies of the Tao Te Ching and read each section from each one at the same time. You would think you were reading 10 different books at times. The benefit of reading ancient texts through several translations is that one will see what the original text was actually stating and not what the particular translator thought it was stating.

With that being said, I still respect both Martin and Dieter and what they have committed their lives to. I do not have any personal grudges or complaints towards them as people and what they do. Martin and Dieter both have to know more about astrology than I do, I agree, because they have studied the subject in-depth for years, and I have not. This is a world-class forum with experts and I was not pretending that I know more about astrology than certain others here, and I stated as much more than once.

I should clarify that I am not hurt or resentful, nor am I so attached to my current viewpoints that I confuse intellectual discussion with personal attacks. I am actually very much at peace right now. One of the reasons I wanted to leave is because people consider their own viewpoint as the truth, when it is really a matter of the unknown, and then they tell you that you are "wrong."

If Martin or Dieter or Mark, want to present an alternative Western Indologist scholarly viewpoint to something I state, that is perfectly fine. But it is not fine when someone states that I am "wrong" about matters concerning history, i.e. the unknown and often the unknowable.

I will show you one example of the dirty lens of the mind which obscures ones vision: You stated that the text by Richard Thompson is blinkered ideology, but then you believed Dieter when he stated that the Kaliyuga was invented by Aryabhata in 499 a.d. Dieter's viewpoint is just as much a blinkered ideology as Thompsons! (No offense intended to either of you) Richard Thompson didn't know, and neither does Dieter, nor do I. But I have the right to choose which story I will hold to, and so do you, and so does Dieter. But for you to believe the story of Dieter's and not Thompson's or my own, and state that Dieter's story has more validity because "knowledge is not a democracy," is a case of not discriminating between different types of knowledge, i.e. direct knowledge, second-hand knowledge, speculation, unknown, and unknowable situations.

You said that Thompson's book was a blinkered ideology because he set out to achieve the purpose of advocating the srimad bhagavatam worldview over other worldviews, and Thompson was not about to accept Pingree or any other scholar who advocates something different. But Dieter will not accept the viewpoints from India which I and others have been pointing out to him, and he calls what I say wrong as well.

Every viewpoint is an ideology and when we don't like them or when they appear to be inflexible, or when they appear to be unwilling to accommodate different viewpoints, then we call them blinkered ideology. I have never met a person who did not hold blinkered ideologies. A scholar can give well-thought out reasons for their blinkered ideology, based on their studies and based on other person's studies piled on top of other person's studies, but at the end of the day it is just as much a blinkered ideology as any other less sophisticated ideology.

Western trained Indologists have very different views on India from various schools of thought within India. Some of my teachers were from India, this is how I know.

When you told me about the Buddha saying there are 3 kinds of people we will meet in life: the friendly, the indifferent, and the hostile, you were one of the friendly ones for me. I have returned the favor in my own ways.

It is finished.

Shine on you crazy diamonds!

Peace