Talk:Jyotiḥśāstra

Classical Texts
These are lists by a crank, mixing legitimate texts with what looks like classic traditional list-padding for extra gravity. I can't find many of the names in Pingree's survey (Jyotiḥśāstra in J. Gonda (Ed.), A History of Indian Literature). And all the names have been Hindi-fied. The good news is that we have a WP:RS, the bad news is that the lists will have to be thoroughly revised. rudra (talk) 04:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Is there only sources of Pingree only who is outsider. Please recheck and include traditional accounts also whicj should be given importance.14.99.127.200 (talk) 07:36, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Refer the SOURCES for the list of classical texts(treatises on nativity, hindu electional astrology & samhitas)14.96.37.107 (talk) 05:15, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Quotable quote
By one of the authors in the "Modern Texts" section: Vedic astrology is the modern name for an ancient system of astrology known in Sanskrit as "Jyotish". Modern name? You don't say... rudra (talk) 04:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

"Modern texts"
It should be made clear by what criteria a book (or other text) is to be selected as suitable for inclusion in this resource collection. A lot of people wrote and write about the subject in times that are usually referred to as "modern". They have all sorts of backgrounds, education (or lack thereof), purposes, ideologies etc. So differences in style and content will be enormous. Regarding those I have had a look at myself, B.V.Raman is to my knowledge generally considered the person who was most important for the "modern revival" of Indian astrology, so there can be no question he ought to be mentioned/listed, simply from the point of view of cultural history. K.S.Charak is the best I have seen myself and as a hospital physician (in a position of responsibility) he appeared to write in a sober, science-minded and precise and readable way. On the other hand that uncle Frawley is a missionary with early contacts to one Indian sect cum mission society plus vage affinities to some western esoteric ideas, and it clearly shows in style and content of his writing. If I'd run a project with the rather proud name "encyclopedia" I'd include him under some section on "people active in the field of spreading religious ideas of Indian origin in modern wrapping in (certain circles of) 20th century America/ western society", where he belongs and for people who want to inform themselves about that aspect of contemporary world society; but not under a headline: "resources for studying the topic XY". - Now, that depends on your background and experctations; if you are an esoteric or Indian politicised religious fundamentalist and rather untainted by any western humanities studies, you will perhaps like him and likeminded authors. If your background and taste does more resemble mine, you'd probably wish them to be removed. It is for WP "managers" to decide and make clear what they want, how they wish their project to be received and its reputation to develop over time... / Cheers, -- 147.142.186.54 (talk) 15:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * P.S.: Oh, and Rao also belongs to the "religious neo-con" fraction, I forgot him. Talks an unwelcome deal of politics in between horoscope analysis etc. - The other authors I do not know. -- 147.142.186.54 (talk) 16:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

this page is essentially a dump, and tagged as such. You are most welcome to clean it up. --dab (𒁳) 09:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)