Do Nakshatras Have Elements? Is Ashvini really the First Nakshatra? Nakshatra Misconception #3 & #4

Wanted to do my weekly video for you all, but was very short on time - so here is a no frills, simple video - straight to the content. No edits, enjoy my messups! ;)
Vic's Website: vicdicara.com
You can get access to my readings there, as well as my books and classes on astrology and Vedic philosophy.

[@VJ_7137]

Cool video 👍😎loved the rationale for Kritika and Agni

[@PedraamJam]

You have so much knowledge about this topic.

[@bhavanasureshstephen9040]

Enjoyed! Have a great weekend too Vic.

[@FernandoRaulAstrology]

Good keep them coming. Talk about chapter 46 of volume 2 of BPHS.

[@zahrah997]

That makes sense ... explains many things . Thank you 👍🏽

[@thachandra-tan1224]

the sounds of Krittika: a, i, u, e, comes first in Japanese Language.

[@PedraamJam]

For me nakshatras are more about stories than gods... while signs represent different dimentions of human life.

[@beenthereonce]

Hi Vic, you posit an interesting hypothesis. I certainly agree that the earliest textual reference we have supports your assertion that Krittika is the first Nakshatra. However, by your logic of who or what came first in the earliest layers of the Vedas, Prajapati created Agni. Therefore, Rohini would be the "1st" Nakshatra. Just saying ... Something to think about in terms of your assertion.

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

Agni literally means "comes first". If you want to really pursue this argument, Brahma is not the first being. The first being is Vishnu, so why not Shravana? The reason is that nakshatras are used for karma-kanda. In the karma-kanda pantheon Agni is the first god, and therefore named "Agni" - as I explained in the video. In jñāna- and bhakti- mārg we understand the same thing. Agni comes first. This is the meaning of Brahma Gayatri ("tat savitur vareniyam...") Agni is not just the god of fire. Fire is an embodiment of energy. It therefore is the archetype of consciousness, which is the substrate and "first" aspect of reality. PS - I am not making assertions, it is just an uncontestable fact that the Vedas consider Krittia first and Bharani last. It's in black and white in every Vedic Nakshatra list, and in the Taittiriya's "nakshatra-sūtra."

[@beenthereonce]

@@VicDiCaraAstrology Hi Vic, Your response seems to suggest you are unaware of what I was attempting to point out. I’ll give it one more try with references. I have already agreed above that one of the earliest list of the Nakshatras we have is from the Taittiriya Brahmana. This starts with Krittika. So we seem to agree here. I also agree that Brahma did not create Agni. At the same time, I don’t know why you felt it important to state that when I explicitly wrote that Prajapati created Agni. Why did I write that? Since we are looking at early references, I’ll confine my references to the BCE period. Rigveda 10:121:10 parajāpate na tavadetānyanyo viśvā jātāni pari tābabhūva | yatkāmāste juhumastana no astu vayaṃ sayāma patayorayīṇāma “O! Prajapati You are the only creator of this universe. You are the only care taker of this universe and you are the only destroyer of this universe. You are the only one who creates this universe for emancipation of souls. You are the only one who is Supreme and possessor of this universe”. Sticking to the same general time period as Taittiriya Brahmana, a quote from the Shatapata Brahmana. 2:2:4:1-2 “Prajâpati alone, indeed, existed here in the beginning. He considered, 'How may I be reproduced?' He toiled and performed acts of penance. He generated Agni from his mouth;.” You will find similar references to this creation story in a number of texts from the same period including a Samhita or two making the claim that Agni sprang from the forehead of Prajapati. While Agni is the first god created by Prajapati, who came first? In the time period we are discussing, there was no conflation of Prajapati and Brahma as the same god. This happened later when the holy trinity ascended and kicked Prajapati into the footnotes of history. Look what happened to Varuna and Indra and boohoo, the Rudras had to change their name to Shiva … I don’t mind saying publicly that I have no opinion on a definitive starting Nakshatra, nor do I believe that the assertion of a fixed starting point is important. Lists must begin with something or some point. Most “modern” lists of Nakshatras begin with Ashwini, but I am not implying that is correct or important. If I were compelled to compile a “modern” list, I would begin the list with that Nakshatra which was rising with the Sun on the vernal equinox and go along in order from there. Why? Because that is what is happening at the time I am attempting to compile an accurate list. Is it merely circumstantial that once upon a time the start was deemed to be in Krittika and later deemed to start at Ashwini? Is it merely a coincidence that Krittika and Ashwini were rising with the equinox when these varied lists were allegedly written and compiled? Personal hypothesis aside, we don’t really know exactly, but I may see a pattern. Hope you weren’t feeling attacked by my previous post. I was attempting to point something out because I want you to succeed. You may be a tad trigger happy after all the abuse from the Tropical zodiac “debate”, a case where I support you. Har. It’s a world of ideas.

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

For this sort of stuff, I request that you watch the Bhāgavatam streams. At some point in Part 2 of Bhāgavatam, and/or early Part 3 the Bhāgavatam explained this. Gods are actually shakti of puruṣa. They take specific forms later, via Brahma. For example, even Shiva takes a specific form within a universe by springing from Brahma's forehead/anger. Even Viṣṇu takes a specific form within a universe by springing from Brahma's nose. This doesn't indicate that they don't exist before Brahma gives them a particular form. In any case, it seems off track. The simple point is that Krittika always comes first - because this is how the nakshatras are conceived of. Krttika literally signifies initiation and beginning and sparks. It is the home of Agni, whose name means "first" and who is the first divinity invoked before all others at any ceremony. It makes Yama (lord of death) the last nakshatra, as well.

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

you may also be introducing confusion into your considerations by not taking into account that Prajāpati is a generic term, not a proper name, and it has been applied to many different individuals, and rightly so. In some contexts, there are 10 prajāpati (Dakṣa, Kardama, Marīci, etc). In some contexts Brahmā is prajāpati. In some contexts Viṣṇu/ Nārāyana is prajāpati. You seem to want to explain this by some historical evolution of philosophy concept - which is not an native way of doing it, and is unecessary. My statement that the gods are śakti of Puruṣa is synonymous with the references you gave about the absolute primacy of Prajāpati. Puruṣa = Prajāpati. Pranam.

[@beenthereonce]

@@VicDiCaraAstrology Prajapati is one of the nakshatra gods. So much for generic. Good day Vic.

[@proyc95]

Excellent 💕☺️ 🙏🏼

[@jpsouzamatos]

Which is the name of the musical instrument on the wood wall?

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

there are two. On your left is a tambura. It is a very simple instrument that simply produces a background drone. On your right is a Vina. It is a complex, fretted stringed instrument. Sitar and guitar are later derivations of a Vina. If I remember correctly this type of Vina is Sarasvati Vina.

[@jpsouzamatos]

@@VicDiCaraAstrology thank you very much! How did you learn to play Vina and Sitar?

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

I didnt. I just P.L.A.Y.

[@carlosnaranjo8042]

Hello Vic. This is yet another great video, thank you! I am aware that you do your calculations by hand, which is most impressive, I however rely on Kala software as I don't understand enough to calculate by hand. I have not been able to setup Kala so that I can make Krittika the first Nakshatra, any chance you can shine some light on this? hope this question is worth your time. Thank you kindly!

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

google Vic DiCara Software Setting I don't calculate by hand, where did you get that idea? I *CAN*, but don't.

[@carlosnaranjo8042]

@@VicDiCaraAstrology I got Caught up in semantics i guess ESL.. from your website.. "This 90+ page document, generated by my hand-written calculations and interpretations" that´s where i got that idea..

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

Yes, I have hand-written calculations and interpreations to parse any birth chart. This does not mean I hand-calculate every birth chart. If I did, I would do one reading a day and hardly have energy to do ANYTHING else.

[@KG-dz4zu]

Vicji, great video but there is an ambiguity I don’t get. I thought you were following the teachings of Rishi Parashara, but the statements seem contrary. (I checked in BPHS again) A. Rishi Parashara has mentioned that nakshatra and their deities are to be allocated starting from Ashwini (Dastra), Yama, Vahni (Agni), etc. in that order. This is in Chapter 3 and 6. In fact in chapter 3, he has associated Ashwini with start of Mesha( Aries) Rashi. B. Though Agni represents the start of the creative process, there is required the spark of intent/ seed of vitality and the material ingredients before beginning the Agni rituals. So there is preparatory energies/ work required before starting creation/ form, which may be symbolized by Ashwini and Bharani. Vicji, your videos are very logical. But if your views are to be followed, Rishi Parashara’s teachings and techniques are to be discarded. Please clarify to what extent you find Rishi Parashara’s writings and techniques relevant to today’s times - as per your logic and observations.

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

Follow parashara hora shastra if you like, but in so doing you will contradict what parashara is supposed to be following: the vedas and brahmanas (which in black and white unequivocally state the Krittika is the first and Bharani the last nakshatra). The fact is that Parashara Hora Shastra is a work that emerged in the 20th century. And whose origin is between 6 and 800ce (post Varahamihira), and was completely lost for 900 years. It is a GREAT, AMAZING book - but don't confuse it for a Vedic text. It is modern mixed with 9th century origins.

[@KG-dz4zu]

Well, that clarifies. Actually when we observe the Sanskrit Shlokas in Rishi Parashara’s text, they are well knit together and metered similar to the shlokas in other Vedic texts - thus we understand how all these texts as a group would have withstood the test of time. But if one has lost faith in the writings ascribed to the original scribe of Vedic Astrology, father of Ved Vyas himself, then Jyotish is completely ungrounded and not to be practiced. In the end, religion and spirituality aside, astrology is all about the techniques used. Noble Rishi Parashara would have outlayed his practiced techniques and got them scribed for benefit of the other. Look forward to seeing further videos. It would greatly increase clarity when you show example chart analysis of recent public figures where it is proved that in today’s times, Jyotish techniques fail vs western tropical techniques give more accurate prediction of events. Thanks Vicji.

[@SAYUJYA1000]

I like your way of interpreting vedic astro..pls let me know whether 16 th November 1974 born comes under Anuradha or jyeshta ...lot of confusion arises when some days anuradha n some say jyeshta ..

[@Zbo007]

It is under Vishakha

[@sandhyabagath4593]

Excellent, I want more on poorvashada, people with this nakshatra like hitler

[@PedraamJam]

I belive kritika in its core has the aries energy in it like rohini and first pada of mrigisira. My reasoning for it is that i saw connections between ADAM the first man and kritika. The first man should start at the first sign. Rohini /eve should come next to him in cardinal dharma land (heaven) and then we get mrigisira getting band by temptation to earth (taurus fixed earth) and so on and so forth... i also see bharani last as it is concerned about justice ⚖ hell and heaven and hellish imagery orrr Beautiful girls and stuff to enjoy. So it makes sense if its last I see sun (zodiac) and moon(nakshatra) as one who have lost thier touch and one day will come (im sounding like a crazy prophet rn) that cancer and leo will have the same ruler (like the other zodiac pairs ruled by one planet) which is the union of sun and moon and then the zodiac, the nakshatras and the navamsas will all be in line with each other just how they are meant to be. Do i sound out of my mind or you see potential in the idea? I have more especially about rahu and ketu nakshatras ask me and ill tell you my idea

[@VicDiCaraAstrology]

this is good, but zodiac and nakshatras are two distinct circles. each one has its own "first-man" point. We need not tie them together. Just like the president of India need not be the president of USA. Nor the founder or USA need be the founder of India.

[@alwyn7769]

🙏