(VEDANTA JYOTISH) VEDIC ASTROLOGY

Shyamasundara das

The following is a theoretical ananlysis of the Krishnamurti Padhati and illustrates some of the philosophical debates and wrangling that occasionally goes on in the astrological word. In this cyber-paper we shall scrutinize the Krishnamurti Paddhati (hence forth KP) by investigating: -the history of the KP system -the bastardization of Vedic with Western Astrology -deviations from Parasara

HISTORY
The late K.S. Krishnamurti, has claimed to have created his own system which he called the KP. (It should be explained that padhati indicates unique method, original system etc.) The foundation of his system is assigning the nakshatra rulership of the Vimshottari Mahadasa to the nakshatras. He then divides the nakshatras into subs based on the rulers of the bhuktis in Vimshottari Mahadasa. (Mahadasa is a prognostic device, it is a system of planetary periods, Bhuktis are sub-periods. There are even further sub-divisions.) However the idea of subs in KP is first explained in Hora Sara of Prthuyasas son of Varaha Mihira. The ideas of using Nakshatras are also found in Satyajataka (before Mihira) and other authors long before KP. The idea of using nakshatra and subs was later expanded and expounded by R. Gopalakrsna Rao (aka Meena) in a book called Nadi Jyotisha that was published in two parts in 1938 with the help of B.V. Raman. In the 50's K.S. Krishnamurti claimed that he had invented a new Paddhati or school of astrology. But many scholars like B V Raman and others reminded him that the origins of the theory lay with Satyajataka, Hora Sara and especially the books of Meena. They also told him that simply by mixing the Nadi theory of Meena with a few principles of Parasari astrology and some methods of Western astrology didn't constitute a new system! He should at least own up to the origins of the system and give credit where it was due. But Krishnamurti ignored all advice and claimed that he had created a new system. (B.V. Raman, My Experiences in Astrology, ch 25)

The KP promises so much. If you read the books--six in number, styled as "Readers", the author is very much given to vaunting himself and his system. According to Krishnamurti "only KP is scientific all others unscientific" Unfortunately KP doesn't live up to the claims. This is why for the most part the KP system is not much popular in India. The KP system has a small following in S. India and others scattered here and there and at least one person in Sweden. Krishnamurti's son (who I met) published a magazine "Astrology and Arishta." But I understand that it has gone out of print, a sure sign that it never caught on. So from this we can see that KP is for the most part plagiarized from other better systems and undeserving of the epithet Padhati. Aside from this odious feature just mentioned scholars of Vedic astrology reject it for other reasons.

BASTARDIZATION OF VEDIC AND WESTERN ASTROLOGY TRANS-SATURNIAN PLANETS

In the second KP Reader, chapter 18, page 328-341 he introduces and encourages the use of Uranus and Neptune. These are planets used in Western astrology. The Western assumption is that simply because something is floating out there, whether they be planets like Neptune, moon of planets like Ganymede (moon of Jupiter) or asteroids like Athena; in all cases they should be integrated into the chart. This is the Western hodge-podge attitude. Presently in Western astrology their is a great welter of confusion caused by the introduction of these 'planets.' It started with Neptune, Uranus and Pluto but once Pandora's box was opened they could not stay the flood. Now their are eight Uranian planets (Cupido, Hades, Zeus, Kronos, Apollon, Admetos, Vulcanus and Poseidon; these planets are not physical entities but fictional), and sixteen asteroids commonly used (Ceres, Pallas, Juno, Vesta, Psyche, Eros, Lilith, Toro, Sappho, Amor, Pandora[!], Icarus, Diana, Hidalog, Urania and Chiron) some authors have written books on individual asteroids and their placement in the chart. Then their is Trans-Pluto also known as Bacchus, which has not been discovered yet but is already being delineated. That is not all, a group of Western astrologers is in the process of cataloging about 2400 other 'less' important asteroids calculating ephemerides for them, naming them and giving them meanings. Soon in Western astrology the chart will be so crowded with detritus that it would be more meaningful to scatter a handful of confetti and try to read that. In 1987-88 when I worked at MATRIX software I became very familiar with Western astrology in all its phases. MATRIX had the most sophisticated Western astrology software and these programs contained every conceivable technique known to Western astrology. Some are so bizarre as to baffle how anyone could possibly take them seriously. For example "converse transits:" suppose you are 25 years old. Instead of taking transits now in the present take the transits of the planets as they happened 25 years before you were born. Not only that but the planets should be moving in reverse direction! Anyway, since MATRIX was in the business of writing software they had to please their clients and wrote all this garbage. I asked the senior astrologer-programmers what methods they used from the welter of 'stuff' that they programmed. Stephen Erlewine and Doug Pierce both replied that they

used only transits, not even Secondary Directions (progressed charts) or Solar Returns! Then I asked them if they used the gaggle of asteroid-cum-planets mentioned above. They said no way! That is for the kooks. But I countered that if they accept Neptune, Uranus and Pluto why stop there? Pandora's box has been opened and all hell has broken loose. Many of the New Age astrologers who use all the confetti planets call the others fuddy duddies for being conservative. Anyway this is the result of what happens when there is no guru-parampara. A heterodox nightmare is created. Western astrologers have lost contact with their Vedic roots. It is not planets or space garbage that is important in astrology but 'grahas' as mentioned before in the description of Kerala Astrology. Astrology is a language and the grahas are the letters that make the words. No one would lightly think of introducing a new letter into Sanskrit. For thousands of years it has been around doing very nicely. Introducing trans-Saturnian planets violates Occam's Razor: Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem. "No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary." Thus the Western astrologers are guilty of the fallacy of excessive hypothesis. [It should be noted that Sadaputa, while researching Suryasiddhanta's description of the diameter of the planetary orbs in relation to the Moon, found an amazing co-relation that described the magnitudes of the orbits of the planets in relation to Sun. This relationship only worked for Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus and Saturn. It could not be extrapolated to other planets. This indicates that the 'visible' planets are very special in a cosmic sense for jyotisha purposes. He wrote a paper on the subject which was presented in Hyderabad last January.]

PLACIDUS HOUSE SYSTEM

Just as he has introduced trans-Saturnian planets KP has introduced the Placidius House system first invented by Placidus de Titis (1603-1668) an Italian, Benedictine Monk, author of Tabulae Primi Mobilis, Physiomathematica, and other works. This house system is based on calculating the Midheaven and trisecting the angle between the midheaven and the ascendent according to certain rules. And similarly from the ascendent to Nadir. The houses are thus of unequal sizes. Some houses in the same chart will span over two or three signs and in other places one sign may have two houses in it. This radical phenomena is dependent on the latitude of the chart. The ascendent degree is the first point of the first house. This is one of the plethora of house systems that are currently used in Western astrology along with Regiomontanus, Campanus, Koch, Equal, Mundoscope, Meridian, Porphry, Morinus, Topocentric, and Solar House. This surfeit of house systems has created much confusion in Western Astrology and brought it discredit. Astrology is already a difficult subject why make it harder. In Vedic astrology things are relatively simple there is one main system that the vast majority of astrologers use i.e. the sign=house system as advocated by Varaha Mihira in Brhat Jataka 1.4. Some toy with the Sripati system which is a mid-point version of the Porphry system (Porphry like almost all Western house systems has the lagna as the beginning of the house). And there is also a Vedic equal house system; take the lagna +/- 15 degrees and that is the first house, then add multiples of 30 degrees to get the other houses. I mention these two other systems only for the sake of completion for they are not popular. Western astrologers and their slavish Indian followers forget that astrology is a symbolic language and divinatory system based on simple principles. Instead they get bogged down with complex mathematics.

The addition of extra planets and abstruse house systems have not made better astrologers out of those who use them. None of them can even come close to the amazing astrological tour-de-forces that I have witnessed in India by simple Vedic astrologers who follow the guru-parampara. Vedic astrology is simple in principles but very deep. The same can't be said about Western astrology. Thus to create a bastard system by crossing the two is to foist an astrological varnasankara on the astrological community.

CONSISTENT WITH VEDIC ACCEPTED

This is not to say that there are no principles of Western Astrology that could be adopted into Vedic astrology. The criteria for adoption is that the methods can not contravene the axioms set down by the guru-parampara. Introducing of new planets and erzats house systems is in gross contravention of the guru paramapara.

KP'S DEVIATION FROM VEDIC ASTROLOGY

In the Third Reader of KP Krishnamurti dives deep into his system of assigning the rulership of the 27 nakshatras on a 'permanent' basis to the nine planets. Thus we see on pg 16: "Aswini: 0 deg Aries to 13 deg 20' Aries (Mesha). The first constellation. The sign Aries is ruled by Mars and the constellation is governed by Ketu. Hence, this ZONE indicates the following matters in general..." The same is done for all Nakshatras taking into consideration overlap of nakshatra over two signs. On pg 2 he says about Aries: "All planets moving...get their results modified as they move in the Zodiac. In the first 13 deg 20'... the planet transiting in Aries will be influenced by Ketu, and the constellation is called Aswini. And when it passes between 13 deg 20' and 26 deg 40' Venus influences it; this area is called Bharani..." And on pg 6 he gives the perfect analogy to explain his theory: "Suppose (a) there is a light in the center of a circular room provided with 12 glass panes of different colors (b) around the room there is a verandah and outside it there are 27 glass panes of which the color of 1, 10 and 19 are the same; 2, 11 and 20 differ from 1, 10 and 19 but these three are of the same color; 3, 12 and 21 differ from the others but these three are of the same color as they belong to one group. Similarly, all the 27 panes are of 9 different colors. If a person walks outside the circular verandah looking at the light inside, he will find the color of the light getting changed according to the color of the colored panes. Similarly, the results of the planets are modified by the lord of the sign and indicated [sic] by the lord of the Nakshatra or constellation."

NATURE OF PLANETS AND SIGNS

What does this all imply? Before we can adequately answer this question we must look into a fundamental principle of astrology. The nature of the planets called karakatva and shila, and the natures of the signs.

Each of the planets has certain qualities attached to it and these are deeply studied by astrologers. For example the Sun represents Atma, fire, father, King, authority figures, etc. The list is quite long and whole books could literally be written (and have been) about the nature of one planet. These qualities are considered axiomatic. Some of the qualities of planets are shared some are exclusive. For example Jupiter, Mars and Sun all represent males. But while Mars and Sun represent fire, Jupiter represents ether. While the planetary qualities are axiomatic the qualities of the signs are derived by several factors a few of the main ones are as follows: 1 The ruling planet. 2 Male/female, odd/even, positive/negative. 3 Guna: Chara (movable), Sthira (fixed), Ubhaya (dual) 4 Tattva : Fire, Earth, Air, Water. 5 Human, quadruped, insect. 6 Jiva (live-animal), Mula (plant), Dhatu (mineral) 7 Up-forwards, Down-backwards, both. 8 Nakshatra. Thus the nature of the signs as we know them today, is a result of the combination of the different qualities listed. For example Aires derives its famous qualities because it is: ruled by Mars, is a Movable Male sign, of Fiery nature. It is a quadruped, etc. And it is has in its domain 2.25 nakshatras, namely all of Asvini and Bharani and the first quarter of Krtikka. The nature of Aries is fixed, it has a nitya-lakshana (permanent symptoms) because the elements that make it up are also non-changing and fixed.

WHAT DOES THIS IMPLY?

Getting back to the theoretical ramifications of the KP and what his allocation of Vimshottari rulers onto Nakshatras implies. Since the original nature of the signs do not change, because the constituent building blocks of the sign are changeless, this implies that the rulerships of the Nakshatras as applied by KP are immutable. This means that Aries for example is affected by the planet Mars, the sign ruler, plus the rulers of the constituent nakshatras-- Asvini, Bharani, and the first pada of Krtikka. Thus since these Nakshatras exert an influence on the nature of the sign, and they do, it must be, in KP that it is Ketu, Venus, and .25 of the Sun who contribute their influence to Aries along with Mars who is over all lord of the sign. This is the clear result of his theory. This can be extended to all the signs. Thus Taurus is ruled by Venus over all but effect of .75 of Sun, Moon, and .50 of Mars. And so on.

The problem however is that the assignment of the rulership of various planets to the Nakshatras is only a divinatory device used for prognostication. These assignments of rulers change according to the Mahadasa system employed. Simply because Parasara Muni favored Vimshottari Mahadasa over all others doesn't in any way mean that the planetary assignments of this system to the lunar mansions is permanent.

ASTOTTARI MAHADASA
Astottari Mahadasa, though waning in popularity, is still practiced in Utkal (Eastern India). Though none of Bhaktisiddhanta's Astrological journals or texts have been translated (I would certainly like to know with certainty what ayanamsa he used) I think it would be a fair speculation to assume that he used Astottari Mahadasa. The reason being that when Bhaktisiddhanta was practicing astrology Astottari Mahadasha was the nearly unanimous choice of the Bengali Pandits. In Astottari Mahadasha there are two systems-- Krttikadi and Ardradi depending on which star is assigned to the Sun. In Krttikadi the rulership is thus: Venus rules: U. Bhadrapada-Revati-Asvini-Bharani Sun " : Krttika-Rohini-Mrgasirsha Moon " : Ardra-Punarvasu-Pusya-Aslesha Mars " : Magha-P.Phalguni-U.Phalguni Mercury " : Hasta-Chitta-Svati-Visakha Saturn " : Anuradha-Jyestha-Mula Jupiter " : Purvashada-Uttarashada-Sravana Rahu " : Dhanishta-Satabhisaj-P.Bhadrapada In Ardradi the rulership is thus: Rahu rules: U. Bhadrapada-Revati-Asvini-Bharani Venus " : Krttika-Rohini-Mrgasirsha Sun " : Ardra-Punarvasu-Pusya-Aslesha Moon " : Magha-P. Phalguni-U.Phalguni Mars " : Hasta-Chitta-Svati-Visakha Mercury " : Anuradha-Jyestha-Mula Saturn " : Purvashada-Uttarashada-Sravana Jupiter " : Dhanishta-Satabhisaj-P.Bhadrapada Note that Ketu doesn't rule a star in this system! The length in years in each dasa is: Sun 6 Moon 15 Mars 8 Mercury 17 Saturn 10 Jupiter 19 Rahu 12 Venus 21 ---------- Total 108 There are many other Dasas including Kalachakra Dasa which is considered second only to Vimshottari Dasa. With the advent of PC's many astrologers are practicing with various Dasas as can be seen from the pages of various astrological journals. Anyway the point is made that this assignment of lordship to

Nakshatras by planets is for divinatory purposes only to determine the effects of Dasha's and Bhuktis within the specific Dasha System used. It is unfortunate that because Vimshottari is so popular and important that this mistake has been made.

PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
This discussion is not a display of pedantic polemics without practical consequences to everyday astrological application. A skilled astrologer will often be asked to choose an auspicious time to perform a marriage. This is probably the most common request in ISKCON. Sometimes devotees want to know when to install deities, or conceive a child. Since we want to choose an auspicious time and according to Muhurta texts the position of Candra in favorable nakshatra is crucial, it would behoove us to put the Moon in the right place. If we assume that KP is correct then it stands on good astrological reasoning to choose those stars ruled by subhas--waxing Moon, well connected Mercury, Venus and Jupiter. And to avoid, like the plague, stars ruled by papis--Mars, Saturn, Rahu and Ketu. Stars ruled by the Sun would be mixed because the Sun is Krura (cruel) but not papi (sinful). Yet we find in standard Muhurta texts that P. Phalguni, Purvashada, and Bharani "are dreadful stars and are suitable for nefarious schemes, poisoning, deceit, imprisonment, setting fire and other evil deeds." According to KP these stars are ruled by Venus one of the best of benefics and the planet ruling over love, marriage, harmony and friendship. I wouldn't want Marici to choose my marriage date! Also Jyeshta and Aslesha are: "sharp in nature and they are favorable for incantations, invoking spirits, imprisonment, murders, and separation of friends." In KP these are ruled by Mercury, bosom buddy of Venus, and a subha graha giving favorable results. There are more surprizes. Citta, Anuradha and Mrgasirsa are: "soft stars, they are good for wearing new apparel... and performance of auspicious ceremonies." In KP, Anuradha is ruled by Saturn and the other two by Mars! Very nasty planets. Dhanishta, Satabhisha and Svati are: "auspicious for acquiring vehicles... and going on procession." In KP Dhanista is ruled by Mars the other two by Rahu! You would think that a vehicle, for which Venus is the karaka, should be purchased under a Venus star. And that you would stay away from a Mars or Rahu starS which would certainly lead to accidents and death. And then there is the classic case of Pushyami: "Pushya is supposed to be the most favorable of all the 28 constellations [including Abhijit] and neutralizes almost all doshas or flaws arising out of a number of adverse combinations. The Rsis go to the extent of saying that even if unfavorable combinations are present in the birth horoscope hampering one's success in life, and the ruling constellation and the position of the Moon are all adverse,

Pushyami has the power of neutralizing these evil forces and asserting its benefic nature..[but in spite of these good thing]...Pushya is held to be inauspicious for marriage purposes [you can't have everything]." (All quotes from B.V. Raman's Muhurta, pg 32-33.) Now according to KP, Pushya is ruled by dreaded Saturn the most baneful malefic. There seems to be something very wrong and absurd going on here. I would certainly warn all devotees to not ask an astrologer who uses KP to choose a time for them, you don't know what to expect. Or actually you could just do the opposite of what they recommend and you would be successful.

INTERNAL INCONSISTENCIES
KP suffers from severe internal inconsistencies because of Krishnamurti's mistake of making the rulership of the nakshatras in the Vimshottari system as the actual rulers of the Nakshatras which they are not. He never conceived of the separation between temporary lordship for divinatory purposes and the permanent actual lordship. We ruefully note than in his series of six Readers which include Jataka, Prasna, and one specializing on family matters; that the important branch of Vedic astrology, Muhurta, is conspicuous by its absence. We now know why.

ACTUAL LORDS OF THE NAKSHATRAS

In the Vedic literature, namely: Taitiriya Samhita and Brahmana, Kathaka Samhita, Maitrayani Samhita and Atharvaveda Parisishta; various lists of Nakshatra patis or rather devatas are mentioned. There are sometimes a variation here and there but the final list is as follows: Asvini ->Asvini Kumars Bharani->Yama Krttika->Agni Rohini->Prajapati/Brahma Mrga->Soma/Candra Ardra->Rudra/Siva Punarvasu->Aditi Pushya->Brhaspati Aslesha->Sarpa Magha->Pitris P. Phalguni->Bhaga U. "->Aryaman Hasta->Savitri/Ravi Citra->Tvastri Svati->Vayu Vishaka->Indragni Anuradha->Mitra Jyesta->Indra Mula->Nirriti P Asadha->Apa U."->Visvadevas

Abhijit->Brahma Dhanishta->Vasus Satabhisa->Varuna P Bhadrapada->Aja Ekapad U "->Ahirbudhnya Revati->Pusan On studying this list it becomes easy to see why the muhurta texts give the meaning that they do for the various Nakshatras. For example Bharani ruled by Venus in KP has for its actual devata Yama, lord of death so we now understand its horrifying nature. And Pushya ruled by dreaded Saturn in KP system is actually ruled by Brhaspati preceptor of the devas. It can now also be understood how the nature of the nakshatra Bharani affects Aries. Aries is the sign of the warrior, confrontation, war, death, weapons, etc. These are definitely in tune with the nature of Yama. But very much contradictory to the nature of Venus. So now all makes sense and is consistent.

DIVINATION
It may be argued: that if it works why not use it? Marici and other KP astrologers argue in this way for their PaDdhati or school. But as we have seen it doesn't work for Muhurta so it can not be considered a complete system. Aside from that, it creates misunderstanding about the basic theoretical tenets of astrology such as the nature of signs and rulers of nakshatras. For the sake of argument let us suppose that KP is an internally consistent system. There are many consistent divinatory systems which are essentially languages by which we communicate with God to find out the unknown. Vedic astrology is the best divinatory system known to man. It is the duty of its practitioners to maintain its integrity and purity. As with any language it is difficult to communicate between two different divinatory systems. So if an astrologer wants to be able to communicate with other astrologers he should practice a discipline that closely resembles theirs and is based on the same principles. We find that even if KP were internally consistent, which it is not, the fact that KP uses trans-Saturnian planets and Placidus house system makes it a foreign language. It is no wonder that they had their own magazine "Astrology and Arista." And because it is not a very popular system based on bastardization and inconsistent application of Vedic rules the magazine has gone out of print as admitted by Marici himself. Surely not a sign of vitality. It is often said by KPers that KP gives much more detail than Parasari system. This is a Red Herring. Parasara system also employs nakshatras as mentioned in Satyacarya, Hora Sara, et al, and you will find that great modern astrologers like Raman use the Nakshatras. Though not a great astrologer I also use nakshatras, that is why the program I wrote contains all the subs and has nakshatra spatial matrix.

SHODASAVARGAS BETTER THAN KP

Still even after using nakshatras there is a lot of doubts and nebulousness. To really get details Parasara has given the Shodasavargas. Here many puzzles about the planets are revealed. I have been researching, studying and applying myself to understanding these vargas for 17 years, right from the onset of my study of astrology. How else to understand the effects of several planets in one house? I will not get into this as it is a very long subject matter, perhaps latter I will talk about this.

CONCLUSIONS
We have demonstrated that KP is not a Paddhati or school as it claims because Krishnamurti plagiarized most of it from other places. He has insulted the guru-parampara by introducing incompatible foreign elements, namely Placidus house system and trans-Saturnian planets. (Compatible elements is a different matter.) He has himself misunderstood the theoretical basis of jyotish in regards to the nature of how the Rasis derive their qualities and the mixing up of nitya (permanent) with tatkaklika (temporary) rulership of the nakshatras. The vast majority of astrologers reject his system. While study of Nakshatras is useful and certainly authorized; Shodasavargas, by their very nature are capable of revealing much more information. It is the duty of the Vedic astrologer to carefully protect Vedic astrology from turning into the incomprehensible mess that passes for astrology in the West. To simply blindly accept everything that goes on in India is foolish. We must always be careful to be sure that it is consistent and compatible with the teachings of the acaryas. If not they should be rejected. No one would accept it if we were to mix Krsna Consciousness with Islam or Christianity. In the same way we should not be eager to introduce Bhaktipada schools of astrology. The advice that Nikhilananda gave was very good. But will it be heeded. It may be noted in passing that currently there is a movement among thoughtful Western astrologers to go back to the basics. This renaissance in Western astrology is likely to lead to a purging of the accretions that have enveloped Western astrology. YS Shyamasundara Dasa POST SCRIPT Marici also said: "Even Varaha Mihira made freqent references to the astrology of the Yavanas (Greeks), with whom there had been a fruitful exchange of ideas for at least half a millenium at that time (5th century AD). " My reply: A book could be written on this subject. But I will restrain myself to the following:

The statements made above by Marici are much in doubt. He has doubtless been mislead by Western propaganda. What is the Vedic definition of "Yavana?" You will never find it in any acedemic text. The British, to serve their nefarious purpose have chosen Greek as the meaning. The date of Mihira is also in question. The scholars would like him placed in the 6th century AD. Yet he is supposed to be a contemporary of Vikramaditya of first century BC. Just last week at UCLA Library I made a very interesting find in and old work from the early 1800's about the actual time of Mihira... Don't be duped by the propoganda of the scholars. If you listen to what they say soon you will believe that astrology was unknown in India till the middle of the 2nd century AD! And that it was imported into India by the Greeks. Thus Parikshit didn't have his horoscope done at the time of birth. Next you will believe that Krsna is myth and that there is "so-called Vedic astrology." You already seem to believe in the last part. As for Mihira mentioning Yavana astrologers. It doesn't prove that he was borrowing a foreign astrology. Or approving of alien systems. He also disagreed with their opinions. These Yavanas were living in India not Greece! The last Hellenistic kingdom near India was extinguished about 150 BC at a time when astrology in Greece was in its infancy! India was/is a very conservative and caste conscious country. Though you were in India studying Indian astrology, you were a Mlecha and Yavana Astrologer by their standard. ""The earliest use of the Sanskritized form Yavana can be traced to Ashtadhayi of Panini (c. 5th century BC)..." (Sircar: "The Yavanas", The Age of Imperial Unity, p 102) Though we don't accept Sircar's date for Panini, it is much too late, we will allow it for argument's sake. We just want to point out how the grammarian brings the Yavanas into his Ashtadhyayi. The actual word is Yavanaanii (v.1.49) which succeeding commentators--Katyayana and Pantanjali--have interpreted as "script of the Yavanas." If Panini's Yavanas were the Greeks denoted by the Persian 'Yauna,' we have the implausability of Panini being already so familiar with the Greeks as to be able to cite their very script and of his readers taking in their stride his mention of it rather than a less distant mode of writing to exemplify a grammatical rule."" (K.D. Sethna, Ancient India in a New Light, pg 248) Since even the highly conservative, and wrong, date of 5th century BC puts Panini at least 100 years before the Makedonian invasion of Punjab. So its seems that the Yavanas that Panini speaks about are not Greeks. Of course Yavanas are mentioned in MBharata and Puranas, but scholars, a wrong headed bunch, all think that these are post Christian literatures. "That Panini is refering to non-Greeks will soon be clear. A.K. Narian remarks in The Indo-Greeks (pg.1) "Like other early Indian sources, Panini associates the Yavanas with the Kambhojas." Because Panini's ganapapatha 178 on his Ashtadhyayi's II.1.72 has the phrase: yavanamundah kambojamundah-"shaven headed Yavanas, shaven headed Kambojas." The greatest commentators have accepted this phrase as authentic...What is striking is not only the association of these two peoples but how they are associated. Both Narian and Barua observe how the phrase links up with the story in the Puranas--e.g. the Harivamsa (14.16)--according to which tribes like the Yavanas and Kambojas were Ksatriyas who got degraded and were punished by King Sagara: the punishment of the Yavanas and Kambojas was to be always shaven headed--"getting the heads of the Yavanas wholly shaved and also those of the Kambojas (he) expelled them." (Ibid pg 248)

"What is amazing is that Panini describes the Yavanas and Kambojas as being completely shaven headed with no hair at all but scholars like Narian take it to imply the Greek's custom of wearing short hair."(Ibid pg 249) Herodotus, Thukydides and Plutarch don't describe the Greeks as shaven headed. Indeed Herodotus says of the Spartan law giver Lykurgus that Spartans should wear long hair "As it made handsome men look beautiful, and ugly men look more frightful in war." That Mihira uses some Greek words for signs and houses in Brhat Jataka doesn't mean he borrowed Greek astrology. In India today the word 'book' is commonly used and transliterated into local languages. Does it mean the idea of "book" was unknown in India before the British? In Sanskrit we use 'grantha.' Also you will find in the Bengali-English dictionary the word 'kamel'--camel. This is a Greek word, but camels are not native to Greece, they are native to India! All that can be proved from the presense of a very few Greek words in Mihira's works is that he was familiar with foriegn terminology. Not that Indian borrowed astrology from Greeks. Burgess in the appendix of his translation of Suryasiddhanta basically says the same that it is the Greeks who are the students not the teachers. John Addey a western astrologer famous for introducing the Vedic concept of Shodasavargas into Western astrology, calls these vargas as harmonics. He gives credit for the Indian origin, but the term harmonics has caught on, to the extent that even in India you will see the vargas called as harmonics. I have in my possesion many of the extant works of the Yavana astrologers. I.E. Yavanajataka of Spujidvaja, Vrddha Yavanajataka of Minaraja, etc. I have have been and continue to deeply study the questions relating to the interplay between the Greeks and Indians in ancient times for the last 5 or 6 years and it is one of the reasons I am working with Sadaputa here at the BI. When my research is finished I will publish.