My New Book is Available! 27 Stars, 27 Gods

27 Stars, 27 Gods

The Astrological Mythology of Ancient India

Over a decade of dedicated research! Over a year of writing and editing! With the blessings and guidance of a swāmī , a babajī, and a Sanskrit scholar, Vic DiCara presents you the world’s first accurate, simple and completely awesome explanation of the mythology and meaning within the 27 stars of ancient Indian astrology!

If you are an astrologer or a fan of astrology, you will be transformed by Vic’s radically clear and straightforward explanations of Sanskrit, Vedic mythology, and mastery of intuitive symbolism.

If you are a lover of India and her culture, you will delight in these deep revelations and rare expositions of familiar gods like Viṣṇu, not-so-familiar gods like Varuṇa, and nearly forgotten gods like Ajaikapāt.

If you are a spiritual seeker, you will discover the origin of the universe, the meaning of life, and essential clues in the eternal quest for the “fountain of youth.”

The 150 pages of this book are abundantly replete with exact references and footnotes to satisfy the scholars among you. The book is dripping with dramatic storytelling, filled with philosophy as clear and deep as a Himalayan lake, and precisely presents the perfectly useful astrological symbolism of the divine stars.

Check it out, and buy it!

Calculating Kali Yuga using Astrology

12.2.27-28

Celestial numbers (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

saptarṣīṇāḿ tu yau pūrvau dṛśyete uditau divi
tayos tu madhye nakṣatraḿ dṛśyate yat samaḿ niśi

tenaiva ṛṣayo yuktās tiṣṭhanty abda-śataḿ nṛṇām
te tvadīye dvijāḥ kāla adhunā cāśritā maghāḥ

“Take the two stars in the big dipper that rise first, draw a line straight through them.
The nakshatra that is along this line is an important nakshatra. 

The line stays with the same nakshatra for about 100 human years.
Right now it is connected to Magha Nakshatra (Regulus).”

The two stars refered to in the Big Dipper are commonly used to point strait to Polaris (Dhruva), the “north star” by extending this line northward. If we instead extend it downward to intersect the ecliptic, it will intersect a particular ecliptic star (“nakshatra”). When Bhagavatam was being spoken to Emperor Parikshit the intersected Nakshatra was Magha – which is Regulus, a star in the “front legs” of sidereal Leo.

Stars are fixed in position to one another, however. Or at least, their movement is imperceptibly slow for human beings. It seems that this measurement system is saying to bisect the two front stars of the Big dipper by the celestial North Pole and extend that line downward to intersect the ecliptic. The celestial north pole changes at almost 1 degree of arc per year. So in about 100 / 130 years this line would cross into a new nakshatra (since nakshatras are about 13 degrees of arc in length).

The celestial pole drifts due the a-synchronicity of sidereal and tropical time (aka precession of equinoxes). So this is a way of determining the age by measuring the current World Age by intersecting the tropical point with a sidereal point!

12.2.31

yadā devarṣayaḥ sapta maghāsu vicaranti hi
tadā pravṛttas tu kalir dvādaśābda-śatātmakaḥ

When [this line created by] the big dipper enters Magha (Regulus),
The Fourth Age (Kali), which lasts for twelve hundred years, begins.

I would like to calculate this date, but I cannot do so with the software and tools and time that I have at my command. It is very difficult to maintain accuracy with far distant dates, and commercial software is not reliable. One needs the type of machines that NASA has.

Surya Siddhanta gives a very different statement about when Kali Yuga began. It says it began when all seven planets were in one location near the end of Revati (the ζ – zeta – star in sidereal Pisces). Ebenezer Burgess, with the help of Professor Winlock, the superintendent of the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac, attempted to locate this point in time. He found the closest match in mid February of 3102 B.C.

12.2.32

yadā maghābhyo yāsyanti pūrvāṣāḍhāḿ maharṣayaḥ
tadā nandāt prabhṛty eṣa kalir vṛddhiḿ gamiṣyati

When the [line from the] Big dipper go into Purvashadha,
Kali will get full strength from “Nanda’s dynasty.”

This verse seems to be describing the greatest intensity of Kali. Previously, in text 26, Shuka said, “From your birth till the coronation of King Nanda there will be 1,150 years.” So the idea is that Kali yuga keeps getting worse till it gets close to the end of its 1,200 year cycle.

Purvashada (Delta Sagittarii) is the 11th nakshatra from Magha. Shuka previously estimated that the Big Dipper’s line crosses nakshatra’s approximately once every 100 years – so this matches. 1,150 years later the line would be in Purvashada.

This strongly demonstrates that the length of Kali Yuga is literally 1,200 years – for it is an astronomical fact that it takes about that much time for the line drawn through the big dipper to move from Magha to Purvashadha.

12.2.33

yasmin kṛṣṇo divaḿ yātas tasminn eva tadāhani
pratipannaḿ kali-yugam iti prāhuḥ purā-vidaḥ

Historians say that Krishna departed to the heavens on the same day Kali began.

This is a simple verse without astronomical import, but allowing us to fix the traditional opinion of the historical moment of Krishna’s life on earth as approximately 5000 years ago. (3222 BC)

12.2.34

divyābdānāḿ sahasrānte caturthe tu punaḥ kṛtam
bhaviṣyati tadā nṝṇāḿ mana ātma-prakāśakam

The Fourth Age (Kali) ends after 1000 years.
The First Age (Krta) then comes again and the human mind can perceive itself clearly.

The previous text (31) stated that Kali lasts for 1200 years. The discrepancy between 1000 such years (in this 34th text) and 1200 such years (in text 31) is explained by the “sandhi” or blurring period between ages, which for Kali-Yuga is 100 years at the beginning and 100 years at the end.

One can interpret divyābdānāḿ to mean “celestial years” as in the years of the gods, which are 360 times the “length” of our earthly years. However if one does so, one cannot make sense of the previous statements that Kali reaches it’s nadir after 1,150 years, and that this is marked by the polar line moving through 11 nakshatras.

So one becomes inclined to interpret divyābdānāḿ as a “heavenly revolution” aka a “year.”

Thus we are inclined, from this section, to understand that Kali Yuga persists for 1,200 years.

That would mean that Kali Yuga ended about 3,800 years ago! But we find the symptoms of Kali – extreme ignorance, extremely short lifespan, disease, filth, etc – persisted until about 1000 years ago at least Yukteshwar, the disciple of Lahiri Mahasay, attempted to deal with this by suggesting that Krta does not immediately follow Kali. Rather, Kali descends to its lowest point and then rebounds gradually again towards Krta. So after the “descending” Kali expired 3,800 years ago, another 1,200 years of “ascending” Kali followed.

Still, by this, Kali yuga should have ended 2,600 years ago, which is hardly a match with the observation. The suggestion that Kali began 5,000 years ago is based on Surya-Siddhanta. But Yukteshwar adjusts so that the ascending Kali yuga ends around the 1600s, meaning that it began 2400 years earlier (about 3000 years ago instead of 5000).

If Yukteshwars theory is correct, then we should be moving upwards now through Dwapara, towards Treta, and finally towards Krita, the “First Yuga.” The following text from Bhagavatam gives a clue as to the astronomical condition that would be observed at that time:

12.2.24

yadā candraś ca sūryaś ca tathā tiṣya-bṛhaspatī
eka-rāśau sameṣyanti bhaviṣyati tadā kṛtam

When the Moon and Sun are together in Brihaspati’s Tishya (Pushya Nakshatra (Delta Cancri), entering this location simultaneously – The First Age (Krta) will begin.

This verse seems to say that the hallmark of Krta Yuga’s beginning is that the Moon and Sun will be in exact conjunction in the vicinity of Delta Cancri.

I would like to calculate this moment but I do not have access to sufficiently reliable software. If we could claculate this we could evaluate whether or not Yukteshwar’s theory is at odds with the information given in Bhagavatam.

So far there is significant grounds to consider Yukteshwar’s theory since Shuka has here used a tropical intersection with sidereal locations as the measuring rod for time in the context of yugas, and this is the fundamental basis of Yukteshwar’s measurements as well.

- Vic DiCara

www.vicdicara.com

Are My (Compatibility) Readings Different Now, With a Tropical Zodiac?

QUESTION:  Now that you use the tropical zodiac, does that mean that your readings are different that they have been in the past?  Are your readings similar to what a western astrologer would say, in regarding your compatibility readings?

I’ve been working with tropical zodiac signs since January 2012. Readings I gave before that used sidereal zodiac signs. Just how similar or different this makes the readings is something indirectly discussed in the “Which One is Correct?” section of the article on this page: http://vicdicara.com/12-signs-of-the-zodiac-1.php and also in the various questions towards this subject on my Zodiac FAQ page: http://vicdicara.com/faq.php?id=zodiac

My compatibility readings are composed of two parts: one is the traditional Indian system of evaluation and the other is a more modern system. The Indian system is 90%+ based on Nakshatras (stars) not Rashi (signs), and although I use tropical signs, I use sidereal fixed-stars (nakshatra). Therefore the traditional part of my compatibility readings is not significantly changed. The modern part of the compatibility overview is not so much based on locations of the planets relative to the zodiac, but instead upon the locations of planets relative to each other in the horoscopes of the two individuals. The use of a sidereal or tropical zodiac address for those horoscopes does not usually make a significant difference to that evaluation. To understand this, it might be helpful to watch the my video about the 12 signs, where I talk about what the zodiac does and does not affect in an astrological system. You can find the video on the page I mentioned above: http://vicdicara.com/12-signs-of-the-zodiac-1.php

Most likely a compatibility overview between you and a specific person that I gave you prior to January 2012 would be significantly similar to the overview I would give you today. In whatever differences there prove to be between the two, I would favor, of course, the opinion resulting from my newer system.

Sidereal Zodiac Signs in Rg Veda???

In response to my most recent video, someone sent me this article by G.K.GOEL of Vihar, New Delhi, asking for my comments…

Zodiac signs were visualized by ancient sages in the sky, along the path of the earth around the Sun.

Or is it the path of the Sun around the Earth? It’s not terribly important to the topic at hand – but ancient / classical astrology and the astronomy that it is built on is geocentric.

It is difficult to fix the era, when signs were named by Vedic sages,

If the signs were ever named by “Vedic sages” (Meaning Indian scientists of 3 to 4,000 years ago), why are these names not listed in any Vedic book (Meaning the 4 Vedas – Rg, Sama, Yajur, Atharva)?

but there are many references of sidereal signs based on Star formation in the in sky even in Rigveda .

Where? I have not seen a single definite reference to 12 zodiac signs in Rg Veda – the best I have seen is that the 360 days of the year are split (among other ways) into 12 divisions. There are no names of these divisions that I am aware of, and certainly no assertion that the divisions are not anchored to equinoxes.

They were become very popular and being extensively used in Indian Astrology at least before 2000 B.C.( since 4000 thousand years back).

If this is so why is there no mention of the 12 signs in the astrological text that still survives from arguably semi-Vedic antiquity – the Vedanga Jyotisha?

Rigveda says (6-55-3):
Rayoa dhara asi aaghrne vaso rashi ajaashv , dheevtodheevatah sakha.
This means: 0h Aja and ASHWA, YOU ARE A STREAM OF WEALTH, A SCINTILLATING HEAP OF GEMS YOU ARE FRIENDS OF WISE AND INTELLIGENT.

Is this supposed to have anything to do with 12 sidereal zodiac signs? Rg 6-55-3 is part of a prayer to Pushan. There is no evident astrological relevance whatsoever.

Rigveda richca 4-33-7 read with richa’s 3-9-4(referring to Leo), 3-39-3(referring to Gemini), 5-83-3 (again referring Leo), 6-47-5, 8-93-1, 7-55-7, 1-181-6
(referring Taurus) clearly indicated the change in seasonal cycles on the ingress of Sun in a particular sign in different era(s).

I am almost a little aggravated that the author doesn’t quote these texts and asks me to hunt them down.

4-33-7 is part of a prayer to the Ribhus. It says that they were the guests of “he who is never hidden” for twelve days, and during that time they constructed fields and irrigated them.

Am I supposed to believe that any mention of the number “12″ refers to 12 sidereal zodiac signs?

3-9-4 is part of a prayer to Agni (fire), saying that even in water he is hidden, “like a lion in his lair.” Am I supposed to believe that any mention of a lion refers to “leo” and that this means the Vedic people had 12 sidereal sign?

3-39-3 is part of a prayer to Indra that mentions twins. So anytime the Veda mentions a twin it proves that they had 12 zodiac signs, sidereal, mind you, and that one of them was Gemini????

It’s too rediculous to continue. I’m starting to get irritated at the author for presenting such preposterous support for his claim.

These and similar other richa(s) should have been introduced in Rigveda in different eras, but it was much before the era of Ramayana and Mahabharata.Rigveda contains many references of sidereal signs along with star formations.

Really? Where are those references? Where does the Rg Veda define 12 zodiac divisions and tie them to stars? To the best of my knowledge this is a boldface lie.

Sign Aries should commence from the initial point of Nakshatra Aswani is the ancient Vedic concept. Zodiac signs were fixed and have permanent relationship with Nakshatras in sky (and also identified with physical constellations present in the sky).

If such a concept is in fact an “ancient Vedic” concept – where is the ancient Vedic text stating it??? Is it in the previous mentions of lions and twins spread here and there around the Rg Veda with no astrological context whatsoever?

This statement has no supporting evidence whatsoever. It is simply the authors favorite idea.

It was a late development, when Tropical signs were visualized to commence from
V.E.point, and given the same names as Sidereal signs. In ancient Vedic period only sidereal signs were referred.

If there is any reference to signs at all in the Vedic period, the author has failed to prove it. Much less has he proved that those signs are sidereal and not tropical.

The truth as best I understand it is that in the ancient Vedic period only sidereal NAKSHATRAS were conceived of. There is no record of them utilizing 12 divisions (rashi). Instead there is record of them utilizing 28 and 27 divisions (nakshatras)

No doubt, the days of Equinoxes ad Solstice were considered very auspicious for regulating seasonal/yearly cycles. But Makar Sankranti was always celebrated on the ingress of Sun in Sidereal Capricorn.

Says who?

Makar Sankranti and winter Solstice were falling on different days and were having different significance. In distance past, there was no possibility to name tropical signs after the name of constellations, as tropical signs have no relationship with stars.

This is meaningless.

Stars are in sky and season cycle is only specific to Sun and revolution of earth round the Sun. In ancient past, it was not possible to pin point the location of V.E. point in the Zodiac and its presence on the Zodiac was recognized by full moon and new moon coinciding with the nearest day on which day and night were equal.

This is a preposterous statement and contradicts Surya Siddhanta (see my video). One goes to an area near the equator and places a long pole into the ground, at a 90 degree angle. The day when the shadow of the pole completely dissapears is an equinox. In that day, the last star visible before the Sun rose is the approximate location of the heliacal equinox (“V.E. point.”).

As such, the concept of sidereal signs exists in the sky and synonym to the various shapes and configurations formed in the constellations, whereas Tropical signs are visualized on the path of earth around the Sun.

OK, if you say so…

As the longitudes and location of planets and stars are measured from the centre of earth, it is now convenient to measure Tropical co-ordinates. These are also required to formulate seasonal cycle , for introducing civil calendars and navigation purposes

OK

From time immemorial, Indians were using their festivals and astrological predictions based on sidereal zodiac which was initially and originally observed by VEDIC SAGES in ancient past.

Really? Has the author ever read the most ancient text on Vedic astrology? It fixes festivals on sidereal nakshatra, not a “sidereal zodiac.”

If ancient Vedic literature is scanned, the seasons were identified by ingress of Sun in different sidereal signs and were occurring in different signs in different eras. This also helps to fix time frame for different eras in distance-past as seasons were not permanently linked with sidereal signs.

A most absurd statement, as it would cause the “frozen” season to be the hottest time of the year about 12,000 years ago. As far as my study of Vedic literature, I have not seen any reference to how to define seasons. I find it clearly defined in later Indian literature: Surya-Siddhanta and the Puranas (viz. Srimad Bhagavatam) and in those it is clearly and explicitly said to be equinotical (tropical) in nature. Please see my video for more information.

CONCLUSION :
a) There are references of Stars, Nakshatras and Sidereal signs in ancient Vedic literature.

The ancient Vedic literature references the stars (nakshatra), not the signs, and certainly not the sidereal signs.

b) Vishwamitra (third)-He gave tangible method to identify ingress of
V.E.point in constellations based on his observations during the period of 2382-2352 B.C. THIS PAVED THE way FOR NAMING THE TROPICAL SIGNS. These signs were named after sidereal signs prevalent and in use India.

The author provided no source material whatsoever to prove this. A claim as contentious as this, which would revolutionize the current scientific opinion of who discovered the precession of equinoxes certainly requires a reference to source material.

c) True longitudes of lunar nodes should be used. In ancient times, it was the tradition to use mean Rah, as it was not possible to calculate true RAHU. Now the longitudes of True Rahu are available, there is urgent necessity to replace the use of mean with True Rahu.

This has nothing at all to do with anything presented in the article. I happen to agree that true nodes are preferable to mean nodes, but not that it is “urgent” and certainly not that it has any relevance to the topic of the article.

d) True Citra Pakchha Ayanamsa should be adopted based on Tropical longitude of Star Citra. Sidereal longitude of Citra should always be 180 deg. This will help in checking the correctness of Ayanamsa.

This is another statement that is completely irrelevant to the main topic of the article. This statement itself is also meaningless. “180 degrees” from what?

e) Geocentric longitudes should always be used based on the measurements and observations of modern Astronomy. In fact Siddhantic principles paved the way for more
accurate observations in the modern era with the help of improved methods and instruments. Modern Astronomy provides improvement in Siddhantic parameters, it does not reject them.

Another statement that has nothing at all to do with the article’s main topic. I happen to agree that modern calculations are preferable to the classical ones.

Thought for the Day
WERE REFERENCES OF SIDREAL SIGNS and Planetary Positions IN Valmiki Ramayan regarding the birth of Lord Shri Rama introduced at a later date?

The answer is “absolutely not.”

Why? The fact that the lunar phase does not correlate with the location of Sun and Moon on the birth of Sri Rama as recorded in Ramayana at the date that it seems to have been written is “smoking gun” evidence that the statement was a later interpolation into the original text. Another “smoking gun” is that the reference only exists in the North Indian version of Ramayana. Probably this interpolation was made by an astrologer seeking to inflate the religious significance of astrology.

Sidereal signs were known even in early Rigvedic era.

The author claims that sidereal signs were known in Rg Veda, but he does not prove it to us. His best effort is to cite references scattered here and there in the Veda that talk about a lion, or a bull, or twins outside of any astrological context. The author failed to show that the Rg Veda even conceives of 12 signs, what to speak of establishing that they had a sidereal conception of those signs.

MY CONCLUSION:

This author is speaking about topics that he does not clearly understand.