The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

For vedic astrology discussions and general questions.

Moderators: eye_of_tiger, shalimar123, RishiRahul

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by Rohiniranjan » Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:39 am

My apologies to those friends and well-wishers who might be experiencing a double dose! ;-)

Over the years, at least for the past several decades, the thinking in mainstream (tyros and pros, beginners and higher and much higher ups on the Jyotish hierarchical totem pole, has been that there are TWO SYSTEMS: Parashari and Jaimini! I had ALWAYS had  signficant degree of discomfort for that idea!

The fundamentals of what many know as Jaimini Paddhati (rhyming with Krishnamurti Paddhati which is indeed separate from traditional Jyotish and a few other newer systems and paddhatis, all useful in their sectors of course (this is not a comparison or value judgment!) -- the fundamentals of JP exist in the codex of what we call Parashari Paddhati!

When Mr. K.N. Rao arrived in our reality and realization, back a few decades ago, although he too in his writings seemed to hint at keeping those two apart, at least for jyotish research, his writings, published and those that I was fortunate to read when he graced Ben Collinses Jyotish List which now has turned, grimly, into a battleground for demolition of Jyotish (Ironical, isnt it how these subjects uncared for decimate!), spurred me to look closely into Jaimini system as it was and still called by most!

Mercury is generally thought of as the Shape-changer! Jack of all trades, the generalist, comfortable in many roles, but really speaking so are ALL other astro-indicators! Thus, we get so much variety from basically 12 signs, 27/28 nakshatras (sub-divisions of the 12 signs or their alter egos, perhaps) and 9 planets! Toss in the upagrahas and more the merrier! But, seriously, they also have multiple roles and thus they adequately describe the billions of individuals (IN-DIVIDUALS!) that inhabit the earth and distributed amongst primarily TWO genders but myriads of ages, nationalities, cultures, races and communities, RELIGIONS (That is a BIG ONE!), castes, with STARK DIFFERENCES and INDIVIDUALITIES yet still so many COMMONALITIES!

But each planet, say for simplicity, wears many hats! Each has a lordship responsibilities over houses, yet, each also has an inherent, temporal, functional role as a good guy and a bad guy and a guy who is on the fence or neutral! And, each also has its roles (plural) as a Karaka or significator or more correctly, as an executor (sometimes EXECUTIONER!).

So very human, indeed! Like a woman who has so many roles to play simultaneously! She is a daughter, granddaughter, mother, grandmother, wife, lover, friend, administrator, professional, teacher, activist, writer, perhaps even a jyotishini, and so much more. And men too!

Just like these planets! Just like mercury, the jack of all trades!

Love and Light and a very Happy New Year!

Rohiniranjan
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by Rohiniranjan » Fri Jan 10, 2014 6:36 pm

I've been doing some searches on the net over christmas break on this matter of "Jaimini and Parasara", not in the sense of historical or even seminal research, so please hold back your expectations!

With most of the historical traces, scanty, undocumented or lost, who came first can sound like the old mystery of which arrived first: the chicken or the egg! (No disrespect intended towards either of the Mahan Rishis!)

There does seem to exist many urban myths or strong opinions at the very least amongst voices of jyotish, as I would call those.

Some go as far as claiming that the actual scribe or scribes of Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra, popularly dubbed as BPHS were simply using the name of the original Parashara who was not an astrologer but simply a spiritual great saint!

Others opine that BPHS has had many hands dipping in the growing pot of astrological information and at some point Jaimini system (padas, karakas, karakamshas, certain additional vargas beyond the basic 16, etc etc) got inserted in BPHS.

Some insist that so called Parashari factors and considerations must NOT be mixed with so called Jaimini paddhati and a few groups expressly prohibit any discussion of Jaimini principles in discussions, just like some groups do not permit discussion of the modern or contemporary Systems Approach and essentially close the case there!

Yet others say that they use Jaimini to cross-check the findings showing up in Vimshottari dasha (and in general for the delineations of any chart or nativity); some add a few other dashas, such as yogini and others.

Most admit that no matter what approach is taken, astrological predictions never approach the *sweet* point of 100% FIT!

Such DIVERSITY of opinions is mind-boggling for the sincere beginner in astrology as they shuttle and shuffle between the pillar and the post (make both plurals and with diversity between each of those Ps or ps!)

Anyways, I do not have the ideal endorsement for either THE pillar, nor THE post, but despite certain contestable or at least debatable points, this article by Gary Gomes is a nice read for beginners:

http://www.bava.org/articles/structure- ... astrology/

Ultimately, as Prof. Raman said: The proof of the pudding is in the eating!

To which, I add, "cooking and [eating]"!

But in today's faster than the fastest and convenience-focused times no one like to cook but expects an instant ready to eat package. Like Shaktipat! Alas, such convenience does not exist in divination of a nativity through ANY astrology! Vidya:
V-ery hard work
I-ntelligent choice of techniques that work
D-edication and dogged pursuit (practice)
Y-earning to expand knowledge through continuing education
A-ctive self-scrutiny of successes and failures


Sorry, there is no instant ascension or lasting epiphany on this path!
:smt020

Love and LIGHT!

Rohiniranjan
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

User avatar
RishiRahul
Astrology Reader
Posts: 7188
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
Contact:

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by RishiRahul » Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:32 pm

Rohiniranjan wrote:My apologies to those friends and well-wishers who might be experiencing a double dose! ;-)

Over the years, at least for the past several decades, the thinking in mainstream (tyros and pros, beginners and higher and much higher ups on the Jyotish hierarchical totem pole, has been that there are TWO SYSTEMS: Parashari and Jaimini! I had ALWAYS had  signficant degree of discomfort for that idea!

The fundamentals of what many know as Jaimini Paddhati (rhyming with Krishnamurti Paddhati which is indeed separate from traditional Jyotish and a few other newer systems and paddhatis, all useful in their sectors of course (this is not a comparison or value judgment!) -- the fundamentals of JP exist in the codex of what we call Parashari Paddhati!

When Mr. K.N. Rao arrived in our reality and realization, back a few decades ago, although he too in his writings seemed to hint at keeping those two apart, at least for jyotish research, his writings, published and those that I was fortunate to read when he graced Ben Collinses Jyotish List which now has turned, grimly, into a battleground for demolition of Jyotish (Ironical, isnt it how these subjects uncared for decimate!), spurred me to look closely into Jaimini system as it was and still called by most!

Mercury is generally thought of as the Shape-changer! Jack of all trades, the generalist, comfortable in many roles, but really speaking so are ALL other astro-indicators! Thus, we get so much variety from basically 12 signs, 27/28 nakshatras (sub-divisions of the 12 signs or their alter egos, perhaps) and 9 planets! Toss in the upagrahas and more the merrier! But, seriously, they also have multiple roles and thus they adequately describe the billions of individuals (IN-DIVIDUALS!) that inhabit the earth and distributed amongst primarily TWO genders but myriads of ages, nationalities, cultures, races and communities, RELIGIONS (That is a BIG ONE!), castes, with STARK DIFFERENCES and INDIVIDUALITIES yet still so many COMMONALITIES!

But each planet, say for simplicity, wears many hats! Each has a lordship responsibilities over houses, yet, each also has an inherent, temporal, functional role as a good guy and a bad guy and a guy who is on the fence or neutral! And, each also has its roles (plural) as a Karaka or significator or more correctly, as an executor (sometimes EXECUTIONER!).

So very human, indeed! Like a woman who has so many roles to play simultaneously! She is a daughter, granddaughter, mother, grandmother, wife, lover, friend, administrator, professional, teacher, activist, writer, perhaps even a jyotishini, and so much more. And men too!

Just like these planets! Just like mercury, the jack of all trades!

Love and Light and a very Happy New Year!

Rohiniranjan

Dear Dada,

Yes, a few has said to keep Jaimini & parashari separate= Reason known to me is that we should see Jaimini in terms of rasi drishti & charlaraks.

Maybe it is true with chara dasas, none of which I have found quite foolproof.
Yes, it is easier to justify events by it; rather than predict=my experience.... so much to leave for laaater.

Though Kp is not included in vedic..technically, I have found that kp gives better language to vedic even if we do not use bhava charts.
I am sure this is vice versa too.

Mercury again....

Rishi
Same with Jaimini & parashari.
RishiRahul.com
Astro-Palmist & Numerologist
Accurate timings & solutions to specific questions

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by Rohiniranjan » Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:12 pm

RishiRahul wrote:
Rohiniranjan wrote:My apologies to those friends and well-wishers who might be experiencing a double dose! ;-)

Over the years, at least for the past several decades, the thinking in mainstream (tyros and pros, beginners and higher and much higher ups on the Jyotish hierarchical totem pole, has been that there are TWO SYSTEMS: Parashari and Jaimini! I had ALWAYS had  signficant degree of discomfort for that idea!

The fundamentals of what many know as Jaimini Paddhati (rhyming with Krishnamurti Paddhati which is indeed separate from traditional Jyotish and a few other newer systems and paddhatis, all useful in their sectors of course (this is not a comparison or value judgment!) -- the fundamentals of JP exist in the codex of what we call Parashari Paddhati!

When Mr. K.N. Rao arrived in our reality and realization, back a few decades ago, although he too in his writings seemed to hint at keeping those two apart, at least for jyotish research, his writings, published and those that I was fortunate to read when he graced Ben Collinses Jyotish List which now has turned, grimly, into a battleground for demolition of Jyotish (Ironical, isnt it how these subjects uncared for decimate!), spurred me to look closely into Jaimini system as it was and still called by most!

Mercury is generally thought of as the Shape-changer! Jack of all trades, the generalist, comfortable in many roles, but really speaking so are ALL other astro-indicators! Thus, we get so much variety from basically 12 signs, 27/28 nakshatras (sub-divisions of the 12 signs or their alter egos, perhaps) and 9 planets! Toss in the upagrahas and more the merrier! But, seriously, they also have multiple roles and thus they adequately describe the billions of individuals (IN-DIVIDUALS!) that inhabit the earth and distributed amongst primarily TWO genders but myriads of ages, nationalities, cultures, races and communities, RELIGIONS (That is a BIG ONE!), castes, with STARK DIFFERENCES and INDIVIDUALITIES yet still so many COMMONALITIES!

But each planet, say for simplicity, wears many hats! Each has a lordship responsibilities over houses, yet, each also has an inherent, temporal, functional role as a good guy and a bad guy and a guy who is on the fence or neutral! And, each also has its roles (plural) as a Karaka or significator or more correctly, as an executor (sometimes EXECUTIONER!).

So very human, indeed! Like a woman who has so many roles to play simultaneously! She is a daughter, granddaughter, mother, grandmother, wife, lover, friend, administrator, professional, teacher, activist, writer, perhaps even a jyotishini, and so much more. And men too!

Just like these planets! Just like mercury, the jack of all trades!

Love and Light and a very Happy New Year!

Rohiniranjan

Dear Dada,

Yes, a few has said to keep Jaimini & parashari separate= Reason known to me is that we should see Jaimini in terms of rasi drishti & charlaraks.

Maybe it is true with chara dasas, none of which I have found quite foolproof.
Yes, it is easier to justify events by it; rather than predict=my experience.... so much to leave for laaater.

Though Kp is not included in vedic..technically, I have found that kp gives better language to vedic even if we do not use bhava charts.
I am sure this is vice versa too.

Mercury again....

Rishi
Same with Jaimini & parashari.
Rishi,

There is a lot of things poetical in Jyotish-divination! In fact all the scriptures from earlier human beings (ancestors, forefathers...) are written in verse format. Each sloka is structured as a poem, following the grammatical and syntactical constraints and format of poetry.

So, there is a lot of poetical form in the infrastructure of jyotish, but yet, jyotish is not poetry!  :smt004

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by Rohiniranjan » Sat Jan 11, 2014 6:36 pm

RishiRahul wrote: ...

Dear Dada,

Yes, a few has said to keep Jaimini & parashari separate= Reason known to me is that we should see Jaimini in terms of rasi drishti & charlaraks.

Maybe it is true with chara dasas, none of which I have found quite foolproof.
Yes, it is easier to justify events by it; rather than predict
=my experience.... so much to leave for laaater.

Though Kp is not included in vedic..technically, I have found that kp gives better language to vedic even if we do not use bhava charts.
I am sure this is vice versa too.

Mercury again....

Rishi
Same with Jaimini & parashari.
In this matter, I like Shri K.N. Rao's approach! He recommended using Jaimini as a secondary (that famous word again! :)) technique for cross-checking the findings showing up with so called Parashari analysis! As far as this matter about "after the fact, retro-analysis vs forecasting-predictions, both are necessary for any and all astrologers (going beyond just jyotish-jyotishis). It is like medicine or any other field. One has to practice the craft, but also stay in touch with the subject in general, and to study case-studies, scientific trials etc. Often 'pooh-poohed' by many astrologers, the retro-analyses if done in the right spirit without egotism and bravado etc or trying to find some magical technique anew, can teach us all a lot. And gradually we attune ourselves to the RIGHT MIX of tools that suit us. Your bag of tricks might be different from mine, or from others! Why so? Because divination including astrology (all kinds) is not a science but more like a language! We all for instance speak the same language, but describe and express things differently! Similar is the case with jyotish. No one way is better or worse, but simply unique! So, it is something to be appreciated as part of LILA!

I see KP as an offshoot of Jyotish, somewhat similar to what some insist is the Jaimini Paddhati! Its mainstay is based on a different perspective of vimshottari dasha. The dasha progression scale (time) seen not as units of time but units of arcs: degrees, minutes, seconds that give the subs. The placidian cusps was an interesting novelty added to Jyotish. Maybe Mr. Raphael has some role to play behind that decision, but who knows really!  :smt004

Love and Light,

RR
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

Votive
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 6:07 am

Post by Votive » Sun Jan 12, 2014 2:59 pm

The balance, Sir, as one mazes through the paths with a bewildering variety of mixes and merges. Each path appropriate when the lucidity of Jyotis, the jyotishi and the listener is brighter.
While jyotish is much more than poetry...to borrow from Amitabh's vintage years,

kal aur ayenge jyotish ke taane baane binne waale,
tumse behtar kahne wale hamse behtar sunne waale
raah prakashit karti rahegi baat tumhari...

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Post by Rohiniranjan » Sun Jan 12, 2014 3:05 pm

Votive wrote:The balance, Sir, as one mazes through the paths with a bewildering variety of mixes and merges. Each path appropriate when the lucidity of Jyotis, the jyotishi and the listener is brighter.
While jyotish is much more than poetry...to borrow from Amitabh's vintage years,

kal aur ayenge jyotish ke taane baane binne waale,
tumse behtar kahne wale hamse behtar sunne waale
raah prakashit karti rahegi baat tumhari...

Namastay Votive ji,

Kahnay ko jo thaa, woh to kah gujray rishi aur maharishi
Kaliyug ki aapa-dhaapi may
Jo waqt mila, padha, sochaa, kaha, suna. maana, naa maana
Roshni to MA say milie sabko; kaisay uskaa istemaal kiya!


Rohiniranjan
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

User avatar
RishiRahul
Astrology Reader
Posts: 7188
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
Contact:

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by RishiRahul » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:14 pm

Rohiniranjan wrote:
RishiRahul wrote: ...

Dear Dada,

Yes, a few has said to keep Jaimini & parashari separate= Reason known to me is that we should see Jaimini in terms of rasi drishti & charlaraks.

Maybe it is true with chara dasas, none of which I have found quite foolproof.
Yes, it is easier to justify events by it; rather than predict
=my experience.... so much to leave for laaater.

Though Kp is not included in vedic..technically, I have found that kp gives better language to vedic even if we do not use bhava charts.
I am sure this is vice versa too.

Mercury again....

Rishi
Same with Jaimini & parashari.
In this matter, I like Shri K.N. Rao's approach! He recommended using Jaimini as a secondary (that famous word again! :)) technique for cross-checking the findings showing up with so called Parashari analysis! As far as this matter about "after the fact, retro-analysis vs forecasting-predictions, both are necessary for any and all astrologers (going beyond just jyotish-jyotishis). It is like medicine or any other field. One has to practice the craft, but also stay in touch with the subject in general, and to study case-studies, scientific trials etc. Often 'pooh-poohed' by many astrologers, the retro-analyses if done in the right spirit without egotism and bravado etc or trying to find some magical technique anew, can teach us all a lot. And gradually we attune ourselves to the RIGHT MIX of tools that suit us. Your bag of tricks might be different from mine, or from others! Why so? Because divination including astrology (all kinds) is not a science but more like a language! We all for instance speak the same language, but describe and express things differently! Similar is the case with jyotish. No one way is better or worse, but simply unique! So, it is something to be appreciated as part of LILA!

I see KP as an offshoot of Jyotish, somewhat similar to what some insist is the Jaimini Paddhati! Its mainstay is based on a different perspective of vimshottari dasha. The dasha progression scale (time) seen not as units of time but units of arcs: degrees, minutes, seconds that give the subs. The placidian cusps was an interesting novelty added to Jyotish. Maybe Mr. Raphael has some role to play behind that decision, but who knows really!  :smt004

Love and Light,

RR
Just like Jaimini evolved from Parashar, it is quite natural to follow Jaimini as secondary.

Original Jyotish was Parashari, & K.P. was an offshoot, so also secondary or tertiary.
The mainstays of K.P. are Vimshottari & ruling planets; of which Vimshottari is birth time specific.

K.P. is the same vimshottari, with an extended way of looking at it though stars & subs.
The vismshottari dasa does not change, but the ways of looking at it does.

Physics is a science, while maths is too & similar ones.
These sciences co exist together to give a more complete 'Whole"

Rishi
Better we keep to english
RishiRahul.com
Astro-Palmist & Numerologist
Accurate timings & solutions to specific questions

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by Rohiniranjan » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:33 pm

RishiRahul wrote: ...
Better we keep to english

But Jyotish is ingrained and resplendant with non-english!  :smt004

...?
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

User avatar
RishiRahul
Astrology Reader
Posts: 7188
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
Contact:

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by RishiRahul » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:40 pm

Rohiniranjan wrote:
RishiRahul wrote: ...
Better we keep to english

But Jyotish is ingrained and resplendant with non-english!  :smt004

...?
Dada,

Oh! I was talking of the exchanges between votive & you....I was talking of the future as it was when I posted it.

:)

Rishi
RishiRahul.com
Astro-Palmist & Numerologist
Accurate timings & solutions to specific questions

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by Rohiniranjan » Sun Jan 12, 2014 4:56 pm

RishiRahul wrote:
Rohiniranjan wrote:
RishiRahul wrote: ...
Better we keep to english

But Jyotish is ingrained and resplendant with non-english!  :smt004

...?
Dada,

Oh! I was talking of the exchanges between votive & you....I was talking of the future as it was when I posted it.

:)

Rishi

huh...?
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by Rohiniranjan » Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:20 am

RishiRahul wrote:
...

Just like Jaimini evolved from Parashar, it is quite natural to follow Jaimini as secondary.

Original Jyotish was Parashari, & K.P. was an offshoot, so also secondary or tertiary.
The mainstays of K.P. are Vimshottari & ruling planets; of which Vimshottari is birth time specific.

K.P. is the same vimshottari, with an extended way of looking at it though stars & subs.
The vismshottari dasa does not change, but the ways of looking at it does.

Physics is a science, while maths is too & similar ones.
These sciences co exist together to give a more complete 'Whole"

Rishi...
Dear Rishi,

Since you often have and more so lately had been addressing me -- essentially to a stranger (we have never actually spoken, never met, despite at least one chance a few years ago...! :-) -- as dada (elder brother!), I must respond to *this* fragment of your sharing about science and jyotish and how it perhaps 'evolved'!

I am not sure if Jaimini paddhati "evolved" from Parashari (BPHS) or merely got 'elaborated'! Not the same thing as 'evolved'! Human beings EVOLVED from MONKEYS, but human beings are not mere elaborations of monkeys! Neandrethal Man perhaps?

Physics is indeed a science, as is chemistry; the two pure sciences and biology is a combination of the two and hence far more complex!

MATH is not SCIENCE but a language, really! Though it is the basis of other sciences!

You are a respected divinator and teacher/moderator etc. on this forum, hence your words must carry a lot of weight, naturally! So, I felt that as an observer and hopefully caring and engaged participant like MOST members (hopefully?) here, must point out the problems in your statements I saw since those might give others the wrong impression that MATH is a science, or Jaimini necessarily is an *evolution* from Parashari -- as stated by you so emphatically...!

I ask: Can a child automatically represent an evolved form of a parent? Always...??  ;-)

I shall leave that as a question for ALL to ponder and come to terms with!

That said, KP, I think is way more than merely an extended way of looking at *vimshottari* (as you stated) but a paradigm shift! Extension is connected to the *parent*, a paradigm shift is like finding and connecting to a NEW PARENT!

English, lamentably, is not our first or only language, but hopefully I managed to express well in it, what I must say...?

Please do not ever take any of our sharings, personally! Strangers we might be, but we are all connected! <LOL>

We all are here to learn, something or the other! That had always been my belief, always and wrong or right, loved or hated, embraced or banished -- what needs to be said MUST ALWAYS BE...! ;-)

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

User avatar
RishiRahul
Astrology Reader
Posts: 7188
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
Contact:

Re: The ENIGMA that has baffled me for now several DECADES!

Post by RishiRahul » Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:46 pm

Rohiniranjan wrote:
RishiRahul wrote:
...

Just like Jaimini evolved from Parashar, it is quite natural to follow Jaimini as secondary.

Original Jyotish was Parashari, & K.P. was an offshoot, so also secondary or tertiary.
The mainstays of K.P. are Vimshottari & ruling planets; of which Vimshottari is birth time specific.

K.P. is the same vimshottari, with an extended way of looking at it though stars & subs.
The vismshottari dasa does not change, but the ways of looking at it does.

Physics is a science, while maths is too & similar ones.
These sciences co exist together to give a more complete 'Whole"

Rishi...
Dear Rishi,

Since you often have and more so lately had been addressing me -- essentially to a stranger (we have never actually spoken, never met, despite at least one chance a few years ago...! :-) -- as dada (elder brother!), I must respond to *this* fragment of your sharing about science and jyotish and how it perhaps 'evolved'!
Rishi= Ah! a stranger who was never met.
I like this flavour as its another part of my my identity (hat). Believe me. No jokes on the internet. Treat this as a 'Personal' mail :)
But still we have connected so well.

I am not sure if Jaimini paddhati "evolved" from Parashari (BPHS) or merely got 'elaborated'! Not the same thing as 'evolved'! Human beings EVOLVED from MONKEYS, but human beings are not mere elaborations of monkeys! Neandrethal Man perhaps?
Rishi=I 'guess' it got elorated.

Physics is indeed a science, as is chemistry; the two pure sciences and biology is a combination of the two and hence far more complex!

MATH is not SCIENCE but a language, really! Though it is the basis of other sciences!
Rishi=Strictly speaking you are correct here again.
Also this could be good reading (wiki)=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematic ... as_science

You are a respected divinator and teacher/moderator etc. on this forum, hence your words must carry a lot of weight, naturally! So, I felt that as an observer and hopefully caring and engaged participant like MOST members (hopefully?) here, must point out the problems in your statements I saw since those might give others the wrong impression that MATH is a science, or Jaimini necessarily is an *evolution* from Parashari -- as stated by you so emphatically...!
Rishi= May be I did not explain myself well; sorry, & thanks for the true nice words.
My take is that Jaimini was part of Parashar, but evolved in more details later.
The Truth= I do not know.
Regarding Maths being a science or not is a question like astrology is.
I may be a divinator etc, but I am not a qualified judge to speak out if astrology etc is a science or tool/s.
I agree again. &nbsp;But I do not think of it much as I am not interested much if astrology evolved from the greeks or not.


I ask: Can a child automatically represent an evolved form of a parent? Always...??  ;-)
Rishi= A child evoves from a parent; then develops. In most cases the child is tied to the parents through 'maya'.
The answer to your question is=No. So I agree with you here.
A controversial afterthought: the evolved form of the parent.. is what the child may come up to due to genetics playing.


I shall leave that as a question for ALL to ponder and come to terms with!

That said, KP, I think is way more than merely an extended way of looking at *vimshottari* (as you stated) but a paradigm shift! Extension is connected to the *parent*, a paradigm shift is like finding and connecting to a NEW PARENT!
Rishi= I understand what you mean; but I would call it extended, as the other flavours of vimshottari remains the same. Yes, it is connected to the parent.
The pardigm shift is not like connecting to a new parent; my believe given the astro variables I follow. If the variables change, it will be different.


English, lamentably, is not our first or only language, but hopefully I managed to express well in it, what I must say...?
Rishi= You did, Dada.

Please do not ever take any of our sharings, personally! Strangers we might be, but we are all connected! <LOL>
Rishi= Should we laugh out loud? It's true.

We all are here to learn, something or the other! That had always been my belief, always and wrong or right, loved or hated, embraced or banished -- what needs to be said MUST ALWAYS BE...! ;-)

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan


Love & Respects,

Rishi
RishiRahul.com
Astro-Palmist & Numerologist
Accurate timings & solutions to specific questions

Rohiniranjan
Posts: 7470
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: N.A.

Post by Rohiniranjan » Tue Jan 14, 2014 1:47 am

Dear Rishi,

Thanks for the wiki article on MATH. I read it :-)

Reminiscent of various portals of perceptions that exist for our dear pursuit of astrology, MMMB!

Anyways, the passage is important (from the article):

"Three leading types of definition of mathematics are called logicist, intuitionist, and formalist, each reflecting a different philosophical school of thought.[30] All have severe problems, none has widespread acceptance, and no reconciliation seems possible.[30]
An early definition of mathematics in terms of logic was Benjamin Peirce's "the science that draws necessary conclusions" (1870).[31] In the Principia Mathematica, Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead advanced the philosophical program known as logicism, and attempted to prove that all mathematical concepts, statements, and principles can be defined and proven entirely in terms of symbolic logic. A logicist definition of mathematics is Russell's "All Mathematics is Symbolic Logic" (1903).[32]

Intuitionist definitions, developing from the philosophy of mathematician L.E.J. Brouwer, identify mathematics with certain mental phenomena. An example of an intuitionist definition is "Mathematics is the mental activity which consists in carrying out constructs one after the other."[30] A peculiarity of intuitionism is that it rejects some mathematical ideas considered valid according to other definitions. In particular, while other philosophies of mathematics allow objects that can be proven to exist even though they cannot be constructed, intuitionism allows only mathematical objects that one can actually construct.

Formalist definitions identify mathematics with its symbols and the rules for operating on them. Haskell Curry defined mathematics simply as "the science of formal systems".[33] A formal system is a set of symbols, or tokens, and some rules telling how the tokens may be combined into formulas. In formal systems, the word axiom has a special meaning, different from the ordinary meaning of "a self-evident truth". In formal systems, an axiom is a combination of tokens that is included in a given formal system without needing to be derived using the rules of the system."



Mathematics has, in the same article, been stated as "The Queen of the Sciences". Replace Queen with Mother and I think the statement moves closer to reality and truth! Mathematics is the mother of Sciences and without which the child, aka, science would not have been born, but that does not make Math a science! Though Biblical statements pronounce that the son shall carry (and absolve) the sins of the father, we are now talking about the *mother*! <LOL>

It is not about who is greater, science or math! Remove all science from the world and still MATH shall remain, intact, though as a barren woman! Remove all math from the world and science will become crippled, and turn into superstition, mumbo-jumbo, dare I say, MAGIC and magical thinking?

Sadly, just as some, many, hopefully not most (?) are hell-bent upon to turn astrology and divination into, present august company excepted, naturally! :-(

Science is an unruly child with great potential, but even that wonder-kid requires the culture imparted by its Mother, that gives it logic, language, and strength: MATH!

Lot of folks, and I hope I am not sounding arrogant etc -- confuse between Science and scientific method! Two associated but very different matters! Scientific method and logical approach are more devoutedly embraced by scientists than language lovers (writers, and even more loosely by modern poets, not so much by ancient poets who followed strictly the grammar of poetry, for example our ancient rishis, munis, maharshis, earlier jyotishis who ALL used strict meter when composing Hindu scriptures, including Jyotish!).

Now, LINGUISTS, are another matter! To them language is the object of exploration and I believe they can be called scientists in a sense! So while Language remains closer to MOTHER, Linguists tend to be closer to FATHER SCIENCE! ;-)

But, I do not wish to TRY your or anyone else's patience here or there or anywhere!

I TRIED! Now to each his or her own lifeplan, etc...!

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan
Rohiniranjan
========
JYO-LOGUE

User avatar
RishiRahul
Astrology Reader
Posts: 7188
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:47 am
Location: Kolkata, New York, Toronto
Contact:

Post by RishiRahul » Sun Jan 19, 2014 12:48 pm

Rohiniranjan wrote:Dear Rishi,

Thanks for the wiki article on MATH. I read it :-)

Reminiscent of various portals of perceptions that exist for our dear pursuit of astrology, MMMB!

Anyways, the passage is important (from the article):

"Three leading types of definition of mathematics are called logicist, intuitionist, and formalist, each reflecting a different philosophical school of thought.[30] All have severe problems, none has widespread acceptance, and no reconciliation seems possible.[30]
An early definition of mathematics in terms of logic was Benjamin Peirce's "the science that draws necessary conclusions" (1870).[31] In the Principia Mathematica, Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead advanced the philosophical program known as logicism, and attempted to prove that all mathematical concepts, statements, and principles can be defined and proven entirely in terms of symbolic logic. A logicist definition of mathematics is Russell's "All Mathematics is Symbolic Logic" (1903).[32]

Intuitionist definitions, developing from the philosophy of mathematician L.E.J. Brouwer, identify mathematics with certain mental phenomena. An example of an intuitionist definition is "Mathematics is the mental activity which consists in carrying out constructs one after the other."[30] A peculiarity of intuitionism is that it rejects some mathematical ideas considered valid according to other definitions. In particular, while other philosophies of mathematics allow objects that can be proven to exist even though they cannot be constructed, intuitionism allows only mathematical objects that one can actually construct.

Formalist definitions identify mathematics with its symbols and the rules for operating on them. Haskell Curry defined mathematics simply as "the science of formal systems".[33] A formal system is a set of symbols, or tokens, and some rules telling how the tokens may be combined into formulas. In formal systems, the word axiom has a special meaning, different from the ordinary meaning of "a self-evident truth". In formal systems, an axiom is a combination of tokens that is included in a given formal system without needing to be derived using the rules of the system."



Mathematics has, in the same article, been stated as "The Queen of the Sciences". Replace Queen with Mother and I think the statement moves closer to reality and truth! Mathematics is the mother of Sciences and without which the child, aka, science would not have been born, but that does not make Math a science! Though Biblical statements pronounce that the son shall carry (and absolve) the sins of the father, we are now talking about the *mother*! <LOL>

It is not about who is greater, science or math! Remove all science from the world and still MATH shall remain, intact, though as a barren woman! Remove all math from the world and science will become crippled, and turn into superstition, mumbo-jumbo, dare I say, MAGIC and magical thinking?

Sadly, just as some, many, hopefully not most (?) are hell-bent upon to turn astrology and divination into, present august company excepted, naturally! :-(

Science is an unruly child with great potential, but even that wonder-kid requires the culture imparted by its Mother, that gives it logic, language, and strength: MATH!

Lot of folks, and I hope I am not sounding arrogant etc -- confuse between Science and scientific method! Two associated but very different matters! Scientific method and logical approach are more devoutedly embraced by scientists than language lovers (writers, and even more loosely by modern poets, not so much by ancient poets who followed strictly the grammar of poetry, for example our ancient rishis, munis, maharshis, earlier jyotishis who ALL used strict meter when composing Hindu scriptures, including Jyotish!).

Now, LINGUISTS, are another matter! To them language is the object of exploration and I believe they can be called scientists in a sense! So while Language remains closer to MOTHER, Linguists tend to be closer to FATHER SCIENCE! ;-)

But, I do not wish to TRY your or anyone else's patience here or there or anywhere!

I TRIED! Now to each his or her own lifeplan, etc...!

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

Yes, though there is an effort to discuss whether Mats is a Science or not; Strictly speaking it is not a Science; while Physics etc is.

Maths is more of a tool.

RishiRahul
RishiRahul.com
Astro-Palmist & Numerologist
Accurate timings & solutions to specific questions

Post Reply

Return to “Vedic Astrology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests