Ernst,
can you clarify some inconsistencies in your statements about Parashara and Rasis. On your website and here at certain times you say Rasis are in BPHS (which they clearly are unless one thinks the chapter on Rasis is a later corruption.. which seems unlikely given the detail and specificity).
But in the dialogue w/ Therese and at other times you say things like this "And yes, there is no evidence of Rasis in India before 300 BC." (Even though you said BPHS was much earlier and discussed Rasis)
Below are the statements I refer to:
Thanks
From Your website:
"In conclusion, what does appear unique to Parashara and what is certainly the most important part if not the gist of Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra are:
1. Its descriptions of the Grahas, Rasis, Bhavas and Vargas.
2. The 144 Bhava Yogas detailing the effects of each Bhava lord in each Bhava.
3. The mathematically precise predictive techniques of Shad Bala, Vimshopaka, Ishta and Kashta, and Subha and Asubha Phala.
4. The five groups of Avasthas: Baladi Avasthas, Jagradadi Avasthas, Lajjitadi Avasthas and Shayanadi Avasthas.
These together with the Nakshatra Dasas given in Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra are a perfect system for predicting events.
=================
From Here on the forum:
One of the interesting things about the Rasis/signs is that the astrological texts that originated in India from 600 AD onward do not give the sizes of the signs, while earlier originating texts, such as Brihat Parasahra Hora Shastra do.
=================
the last would have been Parashara of around 900 BC and Jaimini of 300-600 BC or perhaps later. Unfortunatly, most people do not study the works of these two astrologers. Parashara's text was lost from at least 900 AD and recompiled, with errors of course, in the 19th century. Full manuscripts of Jaimini's texts were not discovered until the early 20th century.
And yes, there is no evidence of Rasis in India before 300 BC.
===============
ACTastrology.com
Dedicated to the memory of Charles A. Jayne
Rasis in Brihat Parshara
11 posts • Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Sam_Geppi on Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:36 pm
- Sam_Geppi
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:06 pm
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Ernst_Wilhelm on Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:29 pm
Hello Sam,
Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra is not dated very early because the version we have was compiled in the 19th century from bits and scraps and rewritten by a Hindu Scholar. Parashara lived during the time of the Mahabharata, he was the father of Vyasa in fact and he mentions Yuddhisthira's chart in Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra. But a linguistic study does not date parashara very early. However, this is not unusual for hindu texts as they were all oral until being penned late. Even the Puranas, such as Mahabharata are dated by sholars to have been written between 00 and 700 or so AD. However, these texts are thought to date back to the time of Vyasa, who can be dated from 900-3200 BC depending on whose ideas are followed.
So when I say the oldest texts we have that mention rasis, I mean scholarly dated texts as compared to texts that are believed by the Hindus to have existed long before. Srimhad Bhagavatam supposedly written by Vyasa and told by his sun Suka to the last great king of India at the dawn of the Kali Yuga, dated by most hindus as 3200 BC, is dated by sholars to have been written around 300 AD or even later. As far as sholars are concenred who date these texts, the oldest that mentions rasis is Yavana Jataka and thus these sholars believe that the hindus got the rasis from the greeks. Text book wise, the evidence does point that way. However, India had a rich oral tradition. Even in India these days there are reportedly those who have remembered verbatim the entire epics of the Rayamayana and Mahabharata - thousands upon thousands of Sutras.
A commentator in the 10th century of Varahamihira's texts stated that he had heard of Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra but that he had never seen it. This commentator was considered the most well read astrology of all time - and yet he had never seen Parashara Text. So in the 10th century this text was known by name, but not available. The version we have is maybe dated 17th century at the earliest if I remember correctly, there is rumor of a 16th century version as well. But we know it existed before 10th century according to Varahamihir's commentator, how much earlier we do not know...
Ernst
Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra is not dated very early because the version we have was compiled in the 19th century from bits and scraps and rewritten by a Hindu Scholar. Parashara lived during the time of the Mahabharata, he was the father of Vyasa in fact and he mentions Yuddhisthira's chart in Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra. But a linguistic study does not date parashara very early. However, this is not unusual for hindu texts as they were all oral until being penned late. Even the Puranas, such as Mahabharata are dated by sholars to have been written between 00 and 700 or so AD. However, these texts are thought to date back to the time of Vyasa, who can be dated from 900-3200 BC depending on whose ideas are followed.
So when I say the oldest texts we have that mention rasis, I mean scholarly dated texts as compared to texts that are believed by the Hindus to have existed long before. Srimhad Bhagavatam supposedly written by Vyasa and told by his sun Suka to the last great king of India at the dawn of the Kali Yuga, dated by most hindus as 3200 BC, is dated by sholars to have been written around 300 AD or even later. As far as sholars are concenred who date these texts, the oldest that mentions rasis is Yavana Jataka and thus these sholars believe that the hindus got the rasis from the greeks. Text book wise, the evidence does point that way. However, India had a rich oral tradition. Even in India these days there are reportedly those who have remembered verbatim the entire epics of the Rayamayana and Mahabharata - thousands upon thousands of Sutras.
A commentator in the 10th century of Varahamihira's texts stated that he had heard of Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra but that he had never seen it. This commentator was considered the most well read astrology of all time - and yet he had never seen Parashara Text. So in the 10th century this text was known by name, but not available. The version we have is maybe dated 17th century at the earliest if I remember correctly, there is rumor of a 16th century version as well. But we know it existed before 10th century according to Varahamihir's commentator, how much earlier we do not know...
Ernst
- Ernst_Wilhelm
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:07 am
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Sam_Geppi on Sat Mar 14, 2009 4:01 pm
Ernst,
Thanks for clarifying the history.
I understand the specifics of the inconsistencies in your statements and thank you for clarifying that.
Yet, this leads to a lot of confusion. I wonder if you can give a confident answer to this question given the murkiness:
1. Were the Rasi descriptions and endless references to them in (what is called) Brihat Parashara Hora Sastra from the time you attribute to Parashara, or do you think those things were compiled later?
I cannot fathom how Yavana Jataka - with the incomplete and spotty Vedic astrology in it - came Before Parashara. There is not math in it.
To put BPHS in any context - Pre Yavana Jataka - but say they were not using rasis/vargas etc seems to make no sense either. That is why i am asking this.
Just because Yavana Jataka is the earliest known (after BPHS was lost) does not mean it is the origin.
Thanks for clarifying the history.
I understand the specifics of the inconsistencies in your statements and thank you for clarifying that.
Yet, this leads to a lot of confusion. I wonder if you can give a confident answer to this question given the murkiness:
1. Were the Rasi descriptions and endless references to them in (what is called) Brihat Parashara Hora Sastra from the time you attribute to Parashara, or do you think those things were compiled later?
I cannot fathom how Yavana Jataka - with the incomplete and spotty Vedic astrology in it - came Before Parashara. There is not math in it.
To put BPHS in any context - Pre Yavana Jataka - but say they were not using rasis/vargas etc seems to make no sense either. That is why i am asking this.
Just because Yavana Jataka is the earliest known (after BPHS was lost) does not mean it is the origin.
- Sam_Geppi
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:06 pm
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Ernst_Wilhelm on Sat Mar 14, 2009 4:23 pm
Hello Sam,
Sam -- 1. Were the Rasi descriptions and endless references to them in (what is called) Brihat Parashara Hora Sastra from the time you attribute to Parashara, or do you think those things were compiled later?
EW--- no one can say, however, several things make me think it is from before:
A. IN BPHS there is something called shayanadi Avasthas that intertwine nakshatras and Rasis, plus other factors, into one mathematical result. So we see a combination of Rasis and Nakshatras.
B. The Rig Veda makes mention of a 12 fold division in relationship to the 6 seasons - so the Hindus had to have a 12 fold division of some sort.
C. BPHS is a mathematically centered text when it comes to technique - all the texts writen from 00 AD onward do not have any of these very involved and very accurate and useful mathematical principles. So either BPHS came before all those texts, pre 0 AD or latter, post 15th century. Post 15th century is not likely since we know it existed previous to the 10th century and since no written texts with Rasis in them before from 0 -1000 AD mention these mathematical texts, BPHS appears to very likely be of much older origin.
Sam -- I cannot fathom how Yavana Jataka - with the incomplete and spotty Vedic astrology in it - came Before Parashara. There is not math in it.
EW---- Yes, hard to imagine a simple text like Yavana Jatka giving birth to BPHS, however, Yavana Jataka is much better than most of the literature that followed. It is a very overlooked text as compared to texts like saravali, brihat Jataka, phaladeepika, etc. Saravali and Brihat Jataka are, in fact, based on Yavana Jataka. But it is nothing compared to Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra.
Sam -- To put BPHS in any context - Pre Yavana Jataka - but say they were not using rasis/vargas etc seems to make no sense either. That is why i am asking this.
Sam -- Just because Yavana Jataka is the earliest known (after BPHS was lost) does not mean it is the origin.[/quote]
EW--- Yes, especially with India's history of oral transmision. If one were to argue Hinduism based on texts they would have to date hinduism as having began around the 4th century or so when the Mahabharata was dated... It is unfortunate that texts do not hold all the answers but only clues to spark ideas for us to research.
Ernst
Sam -- 1. Were the Rasi descriptions and endless references to them in (what is called) Brihat Parashara Hora Sastra from the time you attribute to Parashara, or do you think those things were compiled later?
EW--- no one can say, however, several things make me think it is from before:
A. IN BPHS there is something called shayanadi Avasthas that intertwine nakshatras and Rasis, plus other factors, into one mathematical result. So we see a combination of Rasis and Nakshatras.
B. The Rig Veda makes mention of a 12 fold division in relationship to the 6 seasons - so the Hindus had to have a 12 fold division of some sort.
C. BPHS is a mathematically centered text when it comes to technique - all the texts writen from 00 AD onward do not have any of these very involved and very accurate and useful mathematical principles. So either BPHS came before all those texts, pre 0 AD or latter, post 15th century. Post 15th century is not likely since we know it existed previous to the 10th century and since no written texts with Rasis in them before from 0 -1000 AD mention these mathematical texts, BPHS appears to very likely be of much older origin.
Sam -- I cannot fathom how Yavana Jataka - with the incomplete and spotty Vedic astrology in it - came Before Parashara. There is not math in it.
EW---- Yes, hard to imagine a simple text like Yavana Jatka giving birth to BPHS, however, Yavana Jataka is much better than most of the literature that followed. It is a very overlooked text as compared to texts like saravali, brihat Jataka, phaladeepika, etc. Saravali and Brihat Jataka are, in fact, based on Yavana Jataka. But it is nothing compared to Brihat Parashara Hora Shastra.
Sam -- To put BPHS in any context - Pre Yavana Jataka - but say they were not using rasis/vargas etc seems to make no sense either. That is why i am asking this.
Sam -- Just because Yavana Jataka is the earliest known (after BPHS was lost) does not mean it is the origin.[/quote]
EW--- Yes, especially with India's history of oral transmision. If one were to argue Hinduism based on texts they would have to date hinduism as having began around the 4th century or so when the Mahabharata was dated... It is unfortunate that texts do not hold all the answers but only clues to spark ideas for us to research.
Ernst
- Ernst_Wilhelm
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:07 am
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Ernst_Wilhelm on Sat Mar 14, 2009 4:37 pm
I would also like to say that it does appear that much of HIndu astrological knowledge has been hidden right in front of our eyes. Hindu philospophy holds that upon the death of Krishna the Kali Yuga began - the Kala yuga being the age of ignorance. At this time all the wise men left and traveled to the Himalayas as they new they could best serve the world through thier contemplations and not through thier teachings which would only be misunderstood by the people of Kali Yuga. Whether this aspect of Hindu Philospophy is true, no man can say for sure, however. The two greatest astrological texts from India, Brihat Parashara HOra Shastra and Jaimini's Upadesa Sutras hide their truths while giving it to us perfeclty.
Brihat Parashara gives perfect mathematical formulas, but nowhere tells us how to use them! So there is the answer he says, now learn how to use it...
Jaimini Sutras states everything in coded and cryptic sutras. Decoding the sutras is the easy thing, then even with the answer staring right at a person it can take 2 years to understand the sutra.
Parashara was a rishi of the time of the Mahabharata and one of the wise men who left the world of men at the commencement of Kali Yuga. Jaimini was one of his disciples. Did they hide thier knowledge so that it could stay pure? Parashara in math and Jaimini is simple but impossible to undertand sutras? Did these sutras get passed on from generation to generation until they were finally written down when writing become popular in India? Or did they hid their astrology behind math and encrypted sutras so that we would have to work for the truth so that we could become better men through study? One answer is mythical and possibly true. The other is certianly true for stuying is what it is all about, it is not about the answers, but the process of arriving at knowledge. These two texts are so much deeper than any other hindu astrology texts, which are like a newspaper sun sign columns in comparision to these two texts. Whatever thier date, wherever thier origin, nothing comes close to them in profundity. For me, I am not into cultures, I am not into dates. Personally, it makes no difference to me when these two texts were written. I study them because there is nothing else like them. Everything else is medicore in comparision. Whowever and wherever they came from, they are the best texts available - I am just glad that somebody somehow, made them available.
Unfortunatly, there is as yet no translation of Jaimini sutras worth reading, it has to be read in the Sanskrit. Brihat Parashara has been translated better and only has a few errors and none in the math, so people would do well to study the mathematical astrology in that text. But again, Parashara only gives the calculations, but what do these calculations mean??? That is the fun part. I covered a lot of it in my Shad Bala course, but there is a lot more still to do.
Ernst
Brihat Parashara gives perfect mathematical formulas, but nowhere tells us how to use them! So there is the answer he says, now learn how to use it...
Jaimini Sutras states everything in coded and cryptic sutras. Decoding the sutras is the easy thing, then even with the answer staring right at a person it can take 2 years to understand the sutra.
Parashara was a rishi of the time of the Mahabharata and one of the wise men who left the world of men at the commencement of Kali Yuga. Jaimini was one of his disciples. Did they hide thier knowledge so that it could stay pure? Parashara in math and Jaimini is simple but impossible to undertand sutras? Did these sutras get passed on from generation to generation until they were finally written down when writing become popular in India? Or did they hid their astrology behind math and encrypted sutras so that we would have to work for the truth so that we could become better men through study? One answer is mythical and possibly true. The other is certianly true for stuying is what it is all about, it is not about the answers, but the process of arriving at knowledge. These two texts are so much deeper than any other hindu astrology texts, which are like a newspaper sun sign columns in comparision to these two texts. Whatever thier date, wherever thier origin, nothing comes close to them in profundity. For me, I am not into cultures, I am not into dates. Personally, it makes no difference to me when these two texts were written. I study them because there is nothing else like them. Everything else is medicore in comparision. Whowever and wherever they came from, they are the best texts available - I am just glad that somebody somehow, made them available.
Unfortunatly, there is as yet no translation of Jaimini sutras worth reading, it has to be read in the Sanskrit. Brihat Parashara has been translated better and only has a few errors and none in the math, so people would do well to study the mathematical astrology in that text. But again, Parashara only gives the calculations, but what do these calculations mean??? That is the fun part. I covered a lot of it in my Shad Bala course, but there is a lot more still to do.
Ernst
- Ernst_Wilhelm
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:07 am
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Sam_Geppi on Sat Mar 14, 2009 4:54 pm
Thanks Ernst.
Exactly my points.
And yes, I agree that Yavana Jataka is a fascinating little text. I like it a lot more than the Jyotish texts that follow.
By the time of Varahamahira (and later Bhattopala) it seems BPHS was but a distant memory - but its influence is clear.
The Yavana jataka is a fascinating look into the astrology being practiced in India at that time.. but it is not the source of "Horoscopic Astrology" in India as many seem to opine now. Linguistic history notwithstanding, the astrology taught in Yavana Jataka is feeble in comparison to BPHS - which has every calculation the astrologer needs.
This successioin of BPHS to Yavana Jataka (not the reverse) would be obvious to anyone who studies / practices Vedic astrology from the ancient texts (BPHS and jaimini Sutras)
BTW - Ernst what do you make of these references from Yavana Jataka that both indicate knowledge of Precession AND using Sidereal Zodiac?
Ch.79 v.31 "The Sun increases between the two ayanas" ** (Knowledge of Precession)
Ch.79 v.51 "Hence the creator placed Ashwini at the head in the circle of signs which is the body of Kala" ** (The rasis start with Ashwini, not the vernal equinox)
There are several other references to the Ayanas (solstices) so they clearly knew about the Seasonal Zodiac.
One could easily make a case that at the time of Yavana Jataka they were using Sidereal Zodiac AND knew of the precession.
** Pingree, D. (1978) The Yavanaja1taka of Sphujidvaja.
Exactly my points.
And yes, I agree that Yavana Jataka is a fascinating little text. I like it a lot more than the Jyotish texts that follow.
By the time of Varahamahira (and later Bhattopala) it seems BPHS was but a distant memory - but its influence is clear.
The Yavana jataka is a fascinating look into the astrology being practiced in India at that time.. but it is not the source of "Horoscopic Astrology" in India as many seem to opine now. Linguistic history notwithstanding, the astrology taught in Yavana Jataka is feeble in comparison to BPHS - which has every calculation the astrologer needs.
This successioin of BPHS to Yavana Jataka (not the reverse) would be obvious to anyone who studies / practices Vedic astrology from the ancient texts (BPHS and jaimini Sutras)
BTW - Ernst what do you make of these references from Yavana Jataka that both indicate knowledge of Precession AND using Sidereal Zodiac?
Ch.79 v.31 "The Sun increases between the two ayanas" ** (Knowledge of Precession)
Ch.79 v.51 "Hence the creator placed Ashwini at the head in the circle of signs which is the body of Kala" ** (The rasis start with Ashwini, not the vernal equinox)
There are several other references to the Ayanas (solstices) so they clearly knew about the Seasonal Zodiac.
One could easily make a case that at the time of Yavana Jataka they were using Sidereal Zodiac AND knew of the precession.
** Pingree, D. (1978) The Yavanaja1taka of Sphujidvaja.
- Sam_Geppi
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:06 pm
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Ernst_Wilhelm on Sat Mar 14, 2009 5:30 pm
Sam_Geppi wrote:Thanks Ernst.
Exactly my points.
And yes, I agree that Yavana Jataka is a fascinating little text. I like it a lot more than the Jyotish texts that follow.
By the time of Varahamahira (and later Bhattopala) it seems BPHS was but a distant memory - but its influence is clear.
The Yavana jataka is a fascinating look into the astrology being practiced in India at that time.. but it is not the source of "Horoscopic Astrology" in India as many seem to opine now. Linguistic history notwithstanding, the astrology taught in Yavana Jataka is feeble in comparison to BPHS - which has every calculation the astrologer needs.
This successioin of BPHS to Yavana Jataka (not the reverse) would be obvious to anyone who studies / practices Vedic astrology from the ancient texts (BPHS and jaimini Sutras)
BTW - Ernst what do you make of these references from Yavana Jataka that both indicate knowledge of Precession AND using Sidereal Zodiac?
Ch.79 v.31 "The Sun increases between the two ayanas" ** (Knowledge of Precession)
Ch.79 v.51 "Hence the creator placed Ashwini at the head in the circle of signs which is the body of Kala ** (The rasis start with Ashwini, not the vernal equinox)
There are several other references to the Ayanas (solstices) so they clearly knew about the Seasonal Zodiac.
One could easily make a case that at the time of Yavana Jataka they were using Sidereal Zodiac AND knew of the precession.
Hi Sam,
actually, the sun increasing between the two ayanas means that the sun moves north and that daylight increases to the northern hemisphere. Here is the full sutra as per pinagree translation:
31. The Sun, in its own measure, traverses the signs; because of this motion
it is regarded as the cause of the day. The length of daylight in a nychthemeron
(increases) and decreases in the two ayanas (i.e., while the Sun is between the
two solstices) by a third part.
The ayanas are the soltsice points and have nothing to do with ayanamsa, so from the winter ayana the sun increases to the summer ayana.
And yes, yavana jataka states 59. By terrible feats of asceticism the two Asvins learned this science from
Prajapati, and the Sun learned it from them; hence the Creator placed the
pair of horses (Asvini) at the beginning of his head in the circle of signs which is
the body of Kala.
Which by itself would confirm sidereal, however, Yavana Jataka also states:
30. One should find that the northern course of the Sun begins at the beginning
of Capricorn, and the southern course at the beginning of the fourth
sign (Cancer); the first equator(-crossing) in the year is at the beginning of
Aries, the second at the beginning of Libra.
This is a fully tropical statement and combined with a fully sidereal statement confirms that the author of yavana jataka simply did not know of precession adn that they actually thought that aswini nakshatras was at the vernal equinox for all time. We find the same ideas in Varahamihira's texts and even the Mahabharata.
Since the hindus had lost the knowledge of precession during the time of the writing of all these texts, it is impossible to know if they intended to follow tropical or sidereal.
The interesting thing is that this debate has been going on since the written word was common almost, since at least 300 BC! YOu would think people could agree after 2300 years. It seems religious beliefs are not the longest lasting form of disagreement after all... A wise man said that when two people disagree the truth is always in the middle. Maybe one day man will discover that the correct zodiac is neither the tropical or sidereal model that man is currently aware of. Ancient texts are still being discovered. Jaimini's second half was discovered not even 100 years ago. 100 years ago Varahahira's panchasiddhantika was thought to be lost. 150 years ago there was no BPHS available. What will we find next? There are texts that even hint of two other possible 12 fold divisions...
Ernst
- Ernst_Wilhelm
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:07 am
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Sam_Geppi on Sat Mar 14, 2009 5:52 pm
Thanks Ernst,
yes i saw the entire "ayana" text, just to be expeditious I paraphrased.
I didn't remember the other contradicting sutra.
Thanks for that.
Do you think the descriptions of the rasis/vargas and how we are supposed to approach them in BPHS is to be trusted?
Or do you think there is a lot of corruption in the sign descriptions, calculations, applications, etc in BPHS?
yes i saw the entire "ayana" text, just to be expeditious I paraphrased.
I didn't remember the other contradicting sutra.
Thanks for that.
Do you think the descriptions of the rasis/vargas and how we are supposed to approach them in BPHS is to be trusted?
Or do you think there is a lot of corruption in the sign descriptions, calculations, applications, etc in BPHS?
- Sam_Geppi
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:06 pm
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Ernst_Wilhelm on Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:46 pm
HI Sam, there is certainly some corruption in the Istha and Kashta chapter towards the end of the chapter. The rasi dashas are heavily corrupt as is most of the Jaimini type stuff. This is very unfortunate because most jaimini "translators" just copy under the jaimini sutra from parashara and really do not even translate the sutra for the reader. The mathematical parts seem very solid all in all and while there is a bit of corruption in one of the Sutras on the Rasis, the rest appears very solid. The corrupt sutra interchanges the pitta Kapha and Vata of Earth Rasis, that is all.In the varga chapter there is corruption in the Vimshopaka area of the chapter, though the meanings of the Vargas appear solid and one has to wonder about the calculation of the Dasamsa. The best part is the mathamatical stuff and the rasis and Grahas and Vargas. The jaimini stuff should be ignored.
Ernst
Ernst
- Ernst_Wilhelm
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:07 am
Re: Rasis in Brihat Parshara
by Therese_Hamilton on Sat Mar 14, 2009 7:59 pm
Ernst and Sam,
May I ask which translation of BPHS you are using? Or original Sanskrit? I'm out of time for today, but later wouild like to review your conversation. I have Santhanam and Sharma's translations, and would like your opinion of them. In no way am I qualified to judge those texts.
I know that the text of YavanaJataka is available on the internet, but do either of you have the book with Pingree's notes and commentary?
Do either of you have Minarja's 4th century text--also translated by Pingree?
Thanks,
Therese
May I ask which translation of BPHS you are using? Or original Sanskrit? I'm out of time for today, but later wouild like to review your conversation. I have Santhanam and Sharma's translations, and would like your opinion of them. In no way am I qualified to judge those texts.
I know that the text of YavanaJataka is available on the internet, but do either of you have the book with Pingree's notes and commentary?
Do either of you have Minarja's 4th century text--also translated by Pingree?
Thanks,
Therese
- Therese_Hamilton
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:21 pm
11 posts • Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests