skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Nakshatra and Stars
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Indian and Asian astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:27 pm    Post subject: Nakshatra and Stars Reply with quote

Hi

I want to reopen a topic already debated in another thread of this forum: the relation between the Nakshatras and the fixed star they relate.

In the past times i've been studding the relations of the fixed stars with the Nakshastras, it seams clear to me that if the Nakshastras were based on asterisms, that I would like to understand better which ones are they in order to deepen my understanding of the Nakshastras.

The Surya-Siddhanta as well as other sources mentions this relations in a very clear way, nevertheless there are some doubts that are still in my mind.

The main matter is which fiducial point should one consider when defining the Nakshastras. The more common option nowadays is to sync the 0 Ashvini with the 0 Aries (Sideral), doing this there some fixed stars that are misplaced regarding their Nakshastras:

Betelgeuse is in Mrigashirsha insteed of Arda

Arcturus is in Chitta insted of Svati

Shaula and Lesath are really in the transitions between Jyeshtha and Mula
etc...

In the Surya Siddanta it's mention that the star zeta Pis is the one that marks the begin of Revati, and this star is at the moment in 26 Pis - So this means that Revati should begin in 26 Pis and not in 1640' Pis. ???
This will also change the relative position of the fixed stars regarding their Nakshastras.

Other hypothesis is liked with the Pleiades. We know that in circa 2000 BC the Vernal point was the Pleiades and that this point was also the mark for Krittika. If we look at the ancient lists of Nakshastras Krittika appears as the 1st one on the list. Would this means that the fiducial point of the Nakshastras is linked with the vernal point? I not very inclined for this, but still is a hypothesis one should consider. Or at least it looks as if the list / order of the Nakshastras changes in time. I think there are recordings of different orders that relates to the vernal point.

Other big problem is Spica and Arcturus, it's said that Spica rules over Chitta and Arcturus over Svati, but as they are so closed together it's impossible that Arcturus in in Svati, unless we make the division between Chitta and Svati go trough these 2 stars. So Spica would be the very end of Chitta and Arcturus the begin of Svati.

Other issue is the link between Vega and Abhijit:
From the books were are told that the Abhijit Nakshatra extends from 6* 40' to 10 *53 of Sign Capricorn and that is ruled by the star Vega (a Lyr) and the presiding deity is Brahma. But when we look at the zodiacal place of the star Vega, she's in 21* 19 Sagittarius... in Purva Ashada


Well... as you see i've a lot in my head...

Looking forward to hear your feed-backs on these matters. Smile

Ricardo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1170
Location: California, USA

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 1:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Ricardo!

It's nice to see a new name here on Skyscript. You've mentioned several ideas in your post, and I'll have to think more about a reply. However, one point is clear, and that is the ancient nakshatras had no boundaries. They were simply single stars or groups of stars or asterisms.

Then when the 27-fold division was introduced equal boundaries were formed. These 27 divisions are really lunar mansions and not the ancient nakshatras at all. So we have two different concepts: the old nakshatras and today's lunar mansions. Although these mansions have the same names as the ancient nakshatras, they are really not the same, though in the majority of cases the nakshatra of he same name falls within the appropriate mansion

But, as you pointed out, Arcturus and Spica cannot be in different mansions. They are both located near the center of Chitra, and with the Lahiri ayanamsa Spica marks the junction between Virgo and Libra.

Many years ago I made a table of the 27 lunar mansions, and the stars that are actually in those mansions. I thought the table was on my web site, but I checked, and it isn't there. I'll have to see if I can find a way to post the table. It was typed in WordPerfect on an old computer (Windows 95 or 98?), probably in the 1990s.

A little later I'll reply to other points in your post unless someone else replies first.

Therese
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Therese

Thank you for the reply.


Therese Hamilton wrote:


However, one point is clear, and that is the ancient nakshatras had no boundaries. They were simply single stars or groups of stars or asterisms.

Then when the 27-fold division was introduced equal boundaries were formed. These 27 divisions are really lunar mansions and not the ancient nakshatras at all. So we have two different concepts: the old nakshatras and today's lunar mansions. Although these mansions have the same names as the ancient nakshatras, they are really not the same, though in the majority of cases the nakshatra of he same name falls within the appropriate mansion.



True that in the ancient nakshatras didn't had no boundaries, but as far as I know, they were also used to track time. It's a quite natural if one look at the sky to see the moon "travelling" each night into different areas of the sky. It's true that maybe the divisions were not so well defined, but I tend to imagine they were regular, as the movement of the moon is.
It would be great to know when is the 1st recording of the division of the arc in 27 sections.... somewhere in siddhantic times ? or even before ? Does anyone know?



Therese Hamilton wrote:

Many years ago I made a table of the 27 lunar mansions, and the stars that are actually in those mansions. I thought the table was on my web site, but I checked, and it isn't there. I'll have to see if I can find a way to post the table. It was typed in WordPerfect on an old computer (Windows 95 or 98?), probably in the 1990s.


I have this already , and I can also share it with the other persons in the forum.
I made a wheel were one can see the actual position of the stars , as well as other important astrological informations. I can send it by email ( PM me)
Check this the pic below for a snippet :

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1170
Location: California, USA

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ricardo Moola wrote:
Quote:
It would be great to know when is the 1st recording of the division of the arc in 27 sections.... somewhere in siddhantic times ? or even before ? Does anyone know?

Martin Gansten posted this on August 18, 2012:

"According to Prof. Michio Yano (I haven't checked this for myself, but I have no reason to doubt him) the 27 equal mansions go back to the Taittirīya-saṃhitā. Difficult to be precise about dates, as nearly always in India, but it's definitely BCE, so quite a while ago."
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6604&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, sure. The list and order of the Nakshatras is really old and can be tracked back to the Taittirīya-saṃhitā and the rest of the Vedas is full with references.
Regarding this check the book of David Frawley - "Gods, Sages and Kings"

My question was referring to the actual division of arc in 1320'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1170
Location: California, USA

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ricardo Moola wrote:
Quote:
My question was referring to the actual division of arc in 1320'.

That division is what Martin Gansten was referring to: "27 equal mansions." [of 13 20' each]

Ricardo, it seems that English isn't your native language (Congratulations on knowing more than one language!!), so it's difficult sometimes to fully comprehend what someone writes.

So knowing that the 27 or 28 ancient nakshatras are different than the 27 equal lunar mansions, I'm not quite clear on the questions you are asking. Are you asking how the mansions (or nakshatras) should be applied in practice?

It seems that over the centuries (especially in the 20th century) the lunar mansions have taken on a life of their own, and are greatly expanded from the short descriptions of nakshatras in the older texts. Kenneth Johnson has pointed out elsewhere that Ernst Wilhelm's Classical Mahurta is helpful in understanding how nakshatras were applied in practical ways.

But so much material on the lunar mansions is very new. The 27 equal mansions are a big research area, and they have been further divided into quadrants (the navamsas).

The all important question remains: Which concepts and rulerships apply only to the ancient nakshatra stars and asterisms, and which apply to one of the equal 27 lunar mansions? It seems obvious to me that any general influence a lunar mansion might have isn't specifically related to the ancient nakshatras as they were most likely limited in area to a few degrees.

The sky is full of stars which we may suppose have their own specific influences. It's possible that lunar mansion influences may directly relate to constellations within the boundaries of each mansion, and of course some of these will correlate with the ancient nakshatra stars.

Therese
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Therese

Therese Hamilton wrote:

That division is what Martin Gansten was referring to: "27 equal mansions." [of 13 20' each]


You are right. I misread the quote.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

Ricardo, it seems that English isn't your native language (Congratulations on knowing more than one language!!), so it's difficult sometimes to fully comprehend what someone writes.


True, English is not my native language, is one of the 5 languages I know beside my mother tongue. Sometimes it's hard to be perfectly correct, so sorry for any misunderstanding.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

So knowing that the 27 or 28 ancient nakshatras are different than the 27 equal lunar mansions, I'm not quite clear on the questions you are asking. Are you asking how the mansions (or nakshatras) should be applied in practice?



I think we do have different perspectives on this matter. I don't make any distinction between the nakshatras and the lunar mansions. On the same way I don't any distinction between the zodiac constellations and the signs, this is one of the main reason I use the whole sign house system. For me in both cases ( nakshatra/lunar mansions and constellations/signs) they are the same.

My main question is : if the stars become completely out of sync with the nakshastras they are associated. How one should react to that.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

It seems obvious to me that any general influence a lunar mansion might have isn't specifically related to the ancient nakshatras as they were most likely limited in area to a few degrees.


I'm afraid I will have to disagree. In my option the lunar mansions are influenced by the nakshatras and theirs stars. This is why i consider relevant the debate about this matter.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

It's possible that lunar mansion influences may directly relate to constellations within the boundaries of each mansion, and of course some of these will correlate with the ancient nakshatra stars.


This is my believe, so this is why I don'y fully understand for instances, the situation of Spica (Chitta) and Arcturus (Svati).
Even if one makes sky simulations 2000 BCE or even before, somethings still don't make sense. Although this exercise of archeo-astrology is really interesting.

Of course the stars are moving and moving in different directions and speeds. Maybe it's an inglorious task to keep track of all this changes and try to fix them in a format that was devolved so long ago.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1170
Location: California, USA

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ricardo Moola wrote:
Quote:
I'm afraid I will have to disagree. In my option the lunar mansions are influenced by the nakshatras and theirs stars. This is why I consider relevant the debate about this matter.

Then it would seem you believe that we must "adjust" the nakshatra stars to place them in the mansion in which they are really located? Would you place both Spica and Arcturus in Chitra? This then makes the feet of Virgo and the Southern Cross the stars of Swati.

It's interesting that in the more modern books the goddess Saraswati has come to be associated with Swati. This association was not seen in the ancient past. Has this new association come about due to the influence of stars that are actually in Swati's mansion? Should Chitra then somehow combine the symbolism of both Arcturus and Spica? It doesn't seem that we can simply "pretend" that Arcturus is located in Swati when using ecliptical measurement.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dears.. it's will be long post, but it has a reason.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

Then it would seem you believe that we must "adjust" the nakshatra stars to place them in the mansion in which they are really located? Would you place both Spica and Arcturus in Chitra? This then makes the feet of Virgo and the Southern Cross the stars of Swati.


I think the stars can not be adjust, as the are "fixed". Although we know now that actually they move (and a lot). Nevertheless if there is some kind of adjustment to be made is on the boundaries of the mansions. As I will suggest latter.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

This then makes the feet of Virgo and the Southern Cross the stars of Swati.


On the study made by Dr. S.Balakrishna, he redefines all the starts of the mansions, with the argument that they should be in the ecliptic. In this his perspective the feet of Virgo are the stars of Swati. Although the study revels interesting aspects and relations, I personally have some reservations regarding this approach.

*****

- The "27 Nakshatras" versus the "28 Nakshastras"

In my recent studies of this matter, I made a comparison between the 27 and 28 version of the Nakshastras.
As we all know there are lists that include a 28th Nakshastra - Abhijit. On the Atharvaveda it's mentioned and also later on. At a certain point in time, the list gets reduced to 27 and it stayed like that until now. Nowadays Abhijit its mainly in electional astrology.

I made two simple list for both versions to compare them:
-27th with the equal division of 13 20
-28th with the equal division of 12 51

Please note:
- These two lists are not the final versions, and might have some mistakes, so please bear with me.
- The lists consist of the boundaries of the mansions and the starts that fall into that space. I did not use all the starts associated with the nakshastras mansion, just the main ones, in order to see what is the difference between the two versions.
- When I write "rightly placed", I'm referring to the most common associated starts of the nakshastras. The ones you will find in most of the books and online. The name of the starts I use, are their common and Arabic names you find more easily on books and on the net.
- It's more easy to compare the 2 lists side by side, but here I don't have means to do it, so I invite you to copy-paste them into two documents in order to see them side by side.
- If you don't want to see the all the list, jump to the end for some initial conclusions.

***

27 Nakshatra - 13 20

    Ashvini - 0 - 1320' Aires
    Sheratan - 1000 Aires (rightly placed)

    Bharani - 13 20' - 2640' Aires
    Bharani - 2412 Aires (rightly placed)

    Krittika - 2640' Aires - 10 Taurus
    Pleiades - 0500 Taurus (rightly placed)

    Rohini - 10 - 2320' Taurus
    Aldebaran - 1547 Taurus (rightly placed)

    Mrigashirsha - 23 20' Taurus - 6 40' Gemini
    Bellatrix - 2657 Taurus (rightly placed)
    Betelgeuse - 0445 Gemini (wrongly placed, it belongs to Arda)

    Arda - 6 40' - 20 Gemini
    ???

    Punarvasu - 20 Gemini - 320' Cancer
    Castor - 2614 Gemini (rightly placed)
    Pollux - 2913 Gemini (rightly placed)

    Pushya - 320' -1640' Cancer
    ???

    Ashlesha - 1640' - 30 Cancer
    Praesepe - 1705 Cancer (wrongly placed, it belongs to Pushya)
    z-Hydra - 2150 Cancer (rightly placed)

    Magha - 0 - 1320' Leo
    Regulus - 0550 Leo (rightly placed)

    Purva Phalguni - 1320' - 2640' Leo
    Zosma - 1719 Leo (rightly placed)
    Chertan - 1925 Leo (rightly placed)

    Uttara Phalguni - 2640' Leo- 10 Virgo
    Denebola - 2737 Leo (rightly placed)

    Hasta - 10 - 2320' Virgo
    Alchiba - 1210 Virgo (rightly placed)

    Chitta - 2320' Virgo - 640' Libra
    Spica - 2950 Virgo (rightly placed)
    Arcturus - 0014 Libra (wrongly placed, it belongs to Svati)

    Svati - 640' - 20 Libra
    ???

    Vishakha - 20 Libra - 320' Scorpio
    Zuben Elgenubi - 2105 Libra (rightly placed)
    Zuben Elschemali - 2522 Libra (rightly placed)

    Anuradha - 320' - 1640' Scorpio
    Acrab - 0911 Scorpio (rightly placed)

    Jyeshtha - 1640' - 30 Scorpio
    Antares - 1546 Scorpio (rightly placed)
    Shaula - 3000 Scorpio (wrongly placed, it belongs to Mula)

    Mula - 0 - 1320' Sagittarius
    Kaus Media - 1035 Sagittarius (wrongly placed, it belongs to Purva Ashadha)

    Purva Ashadha - 1320' - 2640' Sagittarius
    Ascella - 1938 Sagittarius (wrongly placed, it belongs to Uttara Ashada)
    Vega - 2119 Sagittarius

    Uttara Ashadha - 2640' Sagittarius - 10 Capricorn
    Altair - 0747 Capricorn (wrongly placed, it belongs to Shravana)

    Shravana - 10 - 2320' Capricorn
    Rotanev - 2305 Capricorn (wrongly placed, it belongs to Dhanishta)

    Dhanishta - 2320' Capricorn - 640' Aquarius
    ???

    Shatabhisha - 640' - 20 Aquarius
    Sadachbia - 1243 Aquarius (rightly placed)

    Purva Bhadrapada - 20 Aquarius - 320' Pisces
    Markab - 2929 Aquarius (rightly placed)

    Uttara Bhadrapada - 320' - 1640' Pisces
    Scheat - 05 22 Pisces (wrongly placed, it belongs to Purva Bhadrapada)
    Algenib - 15 06 Pisces (rightly placed)

    Revati - 1640' - 30 Pisces
    Alpheraz - 20 18 Pisces (wrongly placed, it belongs to Uttara Bhadrapada)
    z-Pisces - 2554 Pisces (rightly placed)



*****

28 Nakshatra - 12 51


    Ashvini - 0 - 1251 Aires
    Sheratan - 1000 Aires (rightly placed)

    Bharani - 12 51 - 2542 Aires
    Bharani - 2412 Aires (rightly placed)

    Krittika - 2542 Aires - 833 Taurus
    Pleiades - 0500 Taurus (rightly placed)

    Rohini - 833 - 2124 Taurus
    Aldebaran - 1547 Taurus (rightly placed)

    Mrigashirsha - 21 24 Taurus - 4 15 Gemini
    Bellatrix - 2657 Taurus (rightly placed)

    Arda - 4 15 - 1706 Gemini
    Betelgeuse - 0445 Gemini (rightly placed)

    Punarvasu - 1706 - 30 Gemini
    Castor - 2614 Gemini (rightly placed)
    Pollux - 2913 Gemini (rightly placed)

    Pushya - 0 - 1251 Cancer
    ???

    Ashlesha - 12 51 - 2542 Cancer
    Praesepe - 1705 Cancer (wrongly placed, it belongs to Pushya)
    z-Hydra - 2150 Cancer (rightly placed)

    Magha - 2542 Cancer - 833 Leo
    Regulus - 0550 Leo (rightly placed)

    Purva Phalguni - 833 - 2124 Leo
    Zosma - 1719 Leo (rightly placed)
    Chertan - 1925 Leo (rightly placed)

    Uttara Phalguni - 21 24 Leo- 4 15 Virgo
    Denebola - 2737 Leo(rightly placed)

    Hasta - 4 15 - 1706 Virgo
    Alchiba - 1210 Virgo (rightly placed)

    Chitta - 1706 - 30 Virgo
    Spica - 2950 Virgo (rightly placed)

    Svati - 0 - 1251 Libra
    Arcturus - 0014 Libra (rightly placed)

    Vishakha - 12 51 - 2542 Libra
    Zuben Elgenubi - 2105 Libra (rightly placed)
    Zuben Elschemali - 2522 Libra (rightly placed)

    Anuradha - 2542 Libra - 833 Scorpio
    ???

    Jyeshtha - 833 - 2124 Scorpio
    Acrab - 0911 Scorpio (wrongly placed, it belongs to Anuradha)
    Antares - 1546 Scorpio (rightly placed)

    Mula - 2124 Scorpio - 4 15 Sagittarius
    Shaula - 3000 Scorpio (rightly placed)

    Purva Ashadha - 4 15 - 1706 Sagittarius
    Kaus Media - 1035 Sagittarius (rightly placed)

    Uttara Ashadha - 1706 - 30 Sagittarius
    Ascella - 1938 Sagittarius (rightly placed)
    Vega - 2119 Sagittarius (wrongly placed, it belongs to Abhijit)

    Abhijit - 0 - 1251 Capricorn
    Altair - 0747 Capricorn (wrongly placed, it belongs to Shravana)

    Shravana - 12 51 - 2542 Capricorn
    Rotanev - 2305 Capricorn (wrongly placed, it belongs to Dhanishta)

    Dhanishta - 2542 Capricorn - 833 Aquarius
    ???

    Shatabhisha - 833 - 2124 Aquarius
    Sadachbia - 1243 Aquarius (rightly placed)

    Purva Bhadrapada - 2124 Aquarius - 4 15 Pisces
    Markab - 2929 Aquarius (rightly placed)

    Uttara Bhadrapada - 4 15 - 1706 Pisces
    Scheat - 05 22 Pisces (wrongly placed, it belongs to Purva Bhadrapada)
    Algenib - 15 06 Pisces (rightly placed)

    Revati - 1706 - 30 Pisces
    Alpheraz - 20 18 Pisces (wrongly placed, it belongs to Uttara Bhadrapada)
    z-Pisces - 2554 Pisces (rightly placed)



****

Some initial conclusions that one might take from the 28. version:

- Betelgeuse is in the right place - Arda
- Praesepe - the main star-cluster of Pushya it's still out of place
- Arcturus is finally in it's right place - Svati
- Acrab - associated with Anuradha it's now wrongly placed in Jyeshtha
- Shaula - got its right placement in Mula
- Kaus Media - got it's right placement in Purva Ashadha
- Ascella - got it's right placement in Uttara Ashadha
- Vega - is wrongly placed in Uttara Ashadha , it belongs to Abhijit
- Altair - is still out of place
- Rotanev - also still out of place
- Scheat - still out of place
- Alpheraz - still out of place


Well... my general feeling is that it didn't got worse ! Actually many of the misplacement that are present in the 27. version ( and they were a lot) , now fall into their right place on the 28. version.

With this 28. version, one can also establish more parallelisms with the Arabic and Chinese lunar mansions, that also have 28 mansions.

Well... it as a long post... but I'm looking forward to your comments.

Best Regards. Ricardo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1170
Location: California, USA

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ricardo, you didn't say which ayanamsa you are using for these calculations? (This is just for everyone's general information.)
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 6:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Therese Hamilton wrote:
Ricardo, you didn't say which ayanamsa you are using for these calculations? (This is just for everyone's general information.)


Yes, sorry about that - I used Lahiri Ayanamsha, but as I said these were rough calculations just to check. I need to make a more accurate list.

By the way, does anyone know if there is a list of stars already with the Lahiri Ayanamsha ? I only find list with the tropical longitude.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1170
Location: California, USA

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ricardo Moola wrote:
Quote:
By the way, does anyone know if there is a list of stars already with the Lahiri Ayanamsha ? I only find list with the tropical longitude.

I've converted Michael Erlewine's list of 768 fixed stars to Krishnamurti. The tropical longitudes were available on Anne Wright's site.

But may I ask where you found the longitude of Bharani (41 Arietis)? Erlewine's list doesn't include stars that small, and I haven't been able to find the tropical longitudes of stars in that asterism (35, 39, 41 Arietis). On my star map they are well within the mansion of Bharani. (27-fold division)

Some of your longitudes aren't correct with Lahiri's ayanamsa. But it's late tonight, so I'll write more about this tomorrow. I do have the exact Krishnamurti longitudes for most nakshatra stars. These can be adjusted to Lahiri by subtracting six minutes.

Therese
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Therese Hamilton wrote:


But may I ask where you found the longitude of Bharani (41 Arietis)? Erlewine's list doesn't include stars that small, and I haven't been able to find the tropical longitudes of stars in that asterism (35, 39, 41 Arietis). On my star map they are well within the mansion of Bharani. (27-fold division)


I found this information also on Anne Wright's site - Constellation of Words.
Yes, these starts are inside Bharani, either on the 27 or 28 fold division.

Looking forward to read your thoughts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1170
Location: California, USA

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ricardo Moola wrote:
Quote:
I found this information also on Anne Wright's site - Constellation of Words.

I had converted star longitudes from Michael Erlewine's list on Anne's old site. Later she made her new site, "Constellations of Words." I see that she has included a few stars that were not on the Erlewine list, and that list seems to be gone from her site. Perhaps there were copyright problems.

At any rate, it's cumbersome to adjust tropical to sidereal longitudes using the ayanamsa value. It's much easier to make the conversion by taking the difference between the ayanamsa and 30 degrees. Thus, the Lahiri conversion for the year 2000 (used on Anne's site) is 6 8'. So:

41 Aries is 18 12' tropical Taurus; Add 6 8' = 24 20' Aries Lahiri (going back one sign)

(It always strikes me as very silly to use stars in the tropical zodiac as they keep changing in longitude over the years. To my mind that is enough reason to use a sidereal zodiac.)

I will have comments later today.

Added note: (edit)
Ricardo, you aren't always using the nakshatra stars from the Burgess translation of Surya Siddhanta, which have generally been accepted as the ancient nakshatra marking stars. For example, under Mrigashirsha you have listed Bellatrix and Betelgeuse. But the SS primary star for that nakshatra is lamda Orion (Meissa) at 29 56' Taurus plus two phi stars. (27-fold division, Krishnamurti) (Referred to as a Deer's Head.)

These three Orion stars are correctly placed in the 27-fold division. It's true, however, that Betelgeuse is also here, but is listed in the following nakshatra, Ardra, in ancient texts. So the stars of Mrig are correct. It's the Ardra mansion placement that doesn't match the ancient texts. Betelgeuse is at 5 Gemini, and Ardra starts at 6 40' Gemini. (My placements are always Krishnamurti because my tables are set up with that ayanamsa.)

Your placement of Praesepe is incorrect. It's at 13 34' in Cancer, correctly placed in Pushya.

I'm out of computer time for now, probably until this evening. I have only read through your 27-fold list up to Aslesha.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Sirius_and_Procyon



Joined: 25 Jul 2014
Posts: 35

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Therese Hamilton wrote:

At any rate, it's cumbersome to adjust tropical to sidereal longitudes using the ayanamsa value. It's much easier to make the conversion by taking the difference between the ayanamsa and 30 degrees. Thus, the Lahiri conversion for the year 2000 (used on Anne's site) is 6 8'. So:

41 Aries is 18 12' tropical Taurus; Add 6 8' = 24 20' Aries Lahiri (going back one sign)



Ahh!!! This is a great way to do it. Thanks for explanation. I was using the ayanamsa value and doing the counting by hand... which is a bit a nightmare...

Therese Hamilton wrote:

Ricardo, you aren't always using the nakshatra stars from the Burgess translation of Surya Siddhanta, which have generally been accepted as the ancient nakshatra marking stars. For example, under Mrigashirsha you have listed Bellatrix and Betelgeuse. But the SS primary star for that nakshatra is lamda Orion (Meissa) at 29 56' Taurus plus two phi stars. (27-fold division, Krishnamurti) (Referred to as a Deer's Head.)


Yes, you are right. In this case I just used Bellatrix, because I had already the conversion to Sideral made. But in any case, Meissa will fall into Mrigashirsha in both 27 and 28-Fold. I will update my lists with the value you gave me. Thanks.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

Your placement of Praesepe is incorrect. It's at 13 34' in Cancer, correctly placed in Pushya. .


Ahh great !!! I'm happy !

Another great problem we are facing is the movement of the "fixed" stars. Praesepe is a runner . It's position in 1900 was 0557' Leo (tropical values) and in 2000 it was 0720'.
Arcturus is also a runner...
This might be one of the great reasons behind some misplacements inside the right mansions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Indian and Asian astrology All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated