[Advaita-l] Sringeri Panchanga

[H S Chandramouli]

Reg  <<  The problem with the siddhantic panchangas is not as you point out
in observations but the theoretical underpinnings.  This is why I prefer
drksiddha myself. >>,

Please clarify. By drksiddha are you referring to DrikGanitha or something
else ??

Regards

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Jaldhar H. Vyas via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l wrote:
>
> Astronamy is the science observable objects like Sun, Moon, stars and
>> planets. Any Almanac that does not agree with observation is meaningless
>> and psuedoscience.
>>
>>
> Then let it be pseudoscience just like any other calendar.  Do you think
> there are 28 days in February and 31 days in August because of "Science"?
>
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l wrote:
>
> Panchangas have been in vogue and use well before science as we know it
>> today came into existence. They are also based on observations only, but
>> not using techniques using today's science. Even reputed scientists are
>> amazed by the exactness with which such almanacs were compiled well before
>> the scientific  instruments were available.
>>
>
> The problem with the siddhantic panchangas is not as you point out in
> observations but the theoretical underpinnings.  This is why I prefer
> drksiddha myself.
>
> The siddhantas are based on the epicyclic and geocentric model developed
> by the Greek Ptolemy and his commentators.  Aside: this is why I have to
> laught at the people who go on about "Vedic Astrology"  Actually we
> abandoned the system of Lagadhacharyas Vedanga Jyotish in favor of this
> "foreign" system.  I think it speaks to the greatness of our culture that
> we were able to adapt to new and better information and this is why I
> believe we are not losing anything by abandoning the siddhantas.
> Nevertheless it has to be stated that the siddhantas are accurate enough
> for the purpose they are designed for.  When discrepencies with
> observations adjustments are made and everything is right again.  The
> drksiddha systems advantage is that is easier; very little (but not I might
> add 0) extra adjustments need to be made but the end result is the same in
> both cases.
>
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l wrote:
>
> Panchangas whether they are calculated today or in yester years are always
>> based on observations and nothing else.
>> The only thing regrettable is some of the siddhantis have forgotten that
>> we
>> have to refine our methods of calculation
>> as more accurate data comes in and continue to stick to inaccurate
>> calculation. The siddhantis use the value of ayanamsa
>> as given in some old book and refuse to recognise that its value has
>> changed since that book was written.
>>
>
> I think you mean the bija value not ayanamsha.  I think they do update
> this value from time to time but again the level of accuracy needed simply
> does not require constant revision.  Compare the dates of the utssavas in
> this panchanga with any other.  Are there a huge number of differences?  No
> then whats the big deal?
>
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l wrote:
>
> Muhurtas are determined on the basis of nakshatra, rasi, thidhi  etc. These
>> depend on observations. The hypocracy of old siddhantis
>> can easily be seen when they use correct values when calculating eclipses
>> so that pubic may not loose faith in them but use their old methods in
>> other things.
>>
>
> This is a very tendentious reading of the situation.  It makes sense to
> use observations because it is the actual astronomical even we are
> interested in.  But a tithi or rashi is cultural.  Even something like a
> day is not based on a specific observation.  Conventially we now measure a
> day from midnight to midnight.  Julian days (used by astronomers in some
> cases) are from noon to noon.  In the Jewish religion days are from sunset
> to sunset whereas for us they are from sunrise to sunrise.  None of these
> are more "scientific" than the other.
>
>
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l wrote:
>
> I would like to point out that Kanchi Mutt uses Driksiddha Panchanga and
>> Sringeri uses old method panchanga.
>>
>
> Yes.  In the Gujarati Janmabhumi Panchanga, they always print an adesha
> patra from Swami Jayendra Saraswati pointing out that one of his
> predecessors (not the famous Swami Chandrashekharendra Saraswati but a
> previous acharya with the same name) had convened a parishad of pandits
> from all over India specializing not only in jyotisha but nyaya, mimamsa,
> and dharmashastra to examin this question and their verdict was in favor of
> the new method.  For me this is another assurance that the drksiddha method
> is dharmically ok.
>
>
>> How do the traditionalists swallow this dichotomy.
>>
>>
> When a ekadashi is kshaya (omitted) Smartas observe the fast on dashami
> and Vaishnavas on dwadashi.  How to swallow that dichotomy?  Easy it is a
> choice that's all.  If someone asks my opinion, I will advise in favour of
> drksiddha method but thats my opinion and there's nothing "scientific"
> about it and nothing "unscientific" about taking the other side.
>
>
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2016, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l wrote:
>
> And scientists are preeminently qualified to serve as to direct us in the
>> right path than the socalled elders who just repeat what is said in some
>> old text.
>>
>
> Now this is one of the silliest things I have read on advaita-l for a long
> time.  Your fundamental misunderstanding is that you think scientists deal
> with right and wrong.  What they actually deal with is probabilities of
> prediction.  The operation of your car can be described by principles that
> stem from the work of Isaac Newton.  However if you do enough observations
> of enough different situations you will notice anomalies in what Newtonian
> physics ought to predict.  So Relativity and related theories were
> developed to give a more accuratly ( = higher probabalistic) predictive
> model.  Yet when a mechanic fixes your car he uses Newtonian principles
> only.  The higher accuracy of the "more scientific" approach is simply
> irrelevant.  Now if someone tries to launch the next Mangalayan mission
> based on the Surya Siddhanta by all means lodge a complaint but *for the
> purposes of panchanga ganita* "more scientific" buys you nothing.
>
>
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>