Neptune/Chris

[Guest guest]

Dear Chris,

 

Namaste.

 

I was just checking out how often in Sofia's Varga charts Neptune is with Venus,

and it is almost all, but I think her Ashtamsa (8) in the beginning 12 or so

Vargas. Then again her 30th.

 

I'm not studied enough to know, but is it predictable that these planets would

remain together in these other Varga charts due to the way they are configured

and the rate of movement of the planets?

 

What about your friend's chart? In my Varga charts Neptune is with Venus in the

first seven Vargas and then again in the 30th.

 

Do you think this is not relevant in these other Varga charts, and this is an

incorrect use of them? I was just kind of curious and checked.

 

Best regards,

Patrice

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Patrice:

 

>I was just checking out how often in Sofia's Varga charts Neptune is with

Venus, and it is almost all, but I think her Ashtamsa (8) in the beginning

12 or so Vargas. Then again her 30th.

>

>I'm not studied enough to know, but is it predictable that these planets

would remain together in these other Varga charts due to the way they are

configured and the rate of movement of the planets?

 

Right. Basically, the closer planets are in conjunction, the more they

will appear conjuncted varga charts. This is likely behind the essential

astrological truism that closer conjunctions are more powerful. So a 5*

conjunction may only appear in two or three vargas, while a conjunction of

less than one degree will appear in almost all of them.

 

That's fine, but what do we do about Dave Birr's beautiful wife who doesn't

have a conjunction between Venus and Neptune but rather a near exact

sextile? It will only appear conj in a few varga charts. In this case,

varga connections may not tell the tale. Also his wife has a few good

jyotish indicators for beauty so we can't just attribute it all to Neptune.

Venus is in Cancer and Moon aspects it with a 4* orb. Venus also rises in

navamsha. But note: precious little to speak of in her Asc or her Asc ruler.

 

>

>Do you think this is not relevant in these other Varga charts, and this is

an incorrect use of them? I was just kind of curious and checked.

 

I think it's a great use of them. I just don't know how important it is.

One of the great ways to make new discoveries is to blend western ideas

with jyotish ones. Like looking at outer planets in the vargas. Following

Robert's idea about navamsha transits, one should do the same with outer

planet transits. They are very slow moving and therefore can be "speeded

up" by examining their motion in the vargas. Obviously, they will be less

effective, but if they aspect a point with both rashi and navamsha transit,

then it may be noteworthy. Also if the navamsha transit of an outer planet

contacts a key point such as Asc, MC, lagnesh, or dasha lord, then it's

possible that may have manifestations, although most likely in tandem with

other key transits in the chart. The outer planet contact may only colour

the event eg. a Pluto contact with introduce an element of

power/manipulation/coercion to an event.

 

Chris

 

>

[Guest guest]

Hi, I was just looking at Susan's chart, and if I did the arudha lagna

right, her arudha lagna is in Leo with Saturn in it. How about this?

Since Saturn is there, and since Saturn represents truth, then maybe

other people will be able to percieve her as the truly beautiful person

that she is, in all senses, whereas, in Marilyn and Sophia's charts,

maybe people are too caught up in only percieving the beauty of their

material forms? Angie

[Guest guest]

Hi Chris and Angie, Ann, List,

 

Namaste.

 

While checking all the Varga charts yesterday, I also looked at the charts

of a lot of people known for their beauty. Venus and Neptune were there on

many, but definitely not on many as well. It seemed that the charts where

there were no Ve/Ne conjunctions, there were plenty of other indications of

beauty. As with all things related to Jyotish, there was usually more than

one indication of beauty.

 

The thing that got me looking at this so much though, is there are charts,

like mine and others, where with a causual look at the chart it doesn't

indicate beauty and in fact looks like a negative in that department. It is,

in my case, that I'm unlearned sufficiently here to find it in more usual

ways that may require a deeper look.

 

My goal is to become expert in Jyotish. At this point though I am too much a

beginner without having put in the years of study, so it is helpful to see

this by bringing in the outer planets. The whole thing about studying for

looks is again a way to be sure about body type, Ayurvedic study really. Or

to be able to relate it to career as in the case of Sophia, and perhaps the

modeling. Without knowing someone or having seen them, whose chart we may

read, it lends confidence and accuracy if we can describe them. Again, kind

of a point for checking my own accuracy at this point for me. And my goal is

to use body type, coloring, etc., in detecting or improving health, diet,

etc.

 

Also, in my own chart, I can see that there was the trouble perhaps with

braces or teeth at some point, so how does a chart show this and yet still

show beauty? In some cases it seems that the Neptune/Venus may help to

clarify this.

 

Interestingly, both Prince Charles and his sister's charts showed the

Venus/Neptune conjunction. Hers in her Navamsa, I believe. Also, other

famous types had this, like Julius Caesar, Mozart, and yet is it a 'rare'

conjunction from all the charts I looked at.

 

Some of the more modern famous beauties, Farrah Facett, Heather Locklear,

Julia Roberts, etc. didn't have it, but did have other indications of their

beauty. Many of the Venus/Neptune conjunctions were with the older

'classics.' Since I am such a beginner and do not understand yet about the

planets entirely, this made me wonder about the slow movement of the outer

planets. (Is this somehow related to this?)

 

It was though very helpful, and I thought, pretty consistent with many of

these charts. Not the only indicator to be sure, but when there, if we can

still understand about the British Royalty's charts, in each case it did

indicate or reflect the beauty of these famous people. Again though there

were often other indicators as well.

 

Chris, thanks for your very helpful explanation on the Varga charts and your

thoughts on the outer planets.

 

Thanks for all the motivation and thoughts on this,

Patrice

[Guest guest]

Angie:

 

At 11:20 AM 4/22/01 -0500, you wrote:

>Hi, I was just looking at Susan's chart, and if I did the arudha lagna

>right, her arudha lagna is in Leo with Saturn in it. How about this?

 

When you say Susan, I gather you mean Dave Birr's wife. I must apologize

for misleading people on this arudha question. I was right the first time!

If lagnesh is in 7th (like in Susan's case) then arudha lagna should be

the 4th house, not the 10th as I had previously thought. BPHS is quite

clear on this, and Sharma corroborates it clearly as well. I invite others

to please correct this if it's wrong. So for Susan, lagna is Scorpio,

lagnesh Mars is in 7th in Taurus so arudha lagna will be 4th, Aquarius. It

is empty and aspected by its lord Saturn. Not exactly a clear marker for

beauty, although perhaps aspect from house ruler could be considered

advantageous for appearance.

 

So just to review, if lagnesh is in lagna (Sat in Capricorn in the 1st)

then arudha lagna will be the 10th house. If lagnesh is in 7th, then

arudha will be 4th house. If lagesh is in 4th house, then arudha lagha

will be 4th house, NOT the 7th as one might expect.

 

 

>Since Saturn is there, and since Saturn represents truth, then maybe

>other people will be able to percieve her as the truly beautiful person

>that she is, in all senses, whereas, in Marilyn and Sophia's charts,

>maybe people are too caught up in only percieving the beauty of their

>material forms?

 

OK but I would think that arudha lagna represents public perceptions rather

than some objective truth.

Having Saturn in your arudha lagna just doesn't sound like it's conducive

to attractiveness. It would suggest someone who is seen as a serious sober

sort of person.

 

Chris

[Guest guest]

Om Krishnaaya Namah

 

Hi Chris,

 

>

> So just to review, if lagnesh is in lagna (Sat in Capricorn in the 1st)

> then arudha lagna will be the 10th house. If lagnesh is in 7th, then

> arudha will be 4th house. If lagesh is in 4th house, then arudha lagha

> will be 4th house, NOT the 7th as one might expect.

>

 

Perfect! However, there's one more important consideration to be made when

calculating Arudha's (which applies in Susan's case - see last Paragraph).

Both Jaimini and Parashara are clear that Aquarius is ruled by Rahu as well

as Saturn, and Scorpio by Ketu as well as Mars. In finding the Arudha's for

these two signs, we are told to use the stronger Lord. Which system of

strength is to be used is a debatable point. However considering that

Jaimini doesn't mention Shad Bala, Vimshopaka, Ashtakavarga etc. one can be

fairly confident it is not one of these. Instead Jaimini mentions there are

a few "thumb-rule" strengths which are normally used. According to Sanjay's

translation of the Jaimini Sutra's and what's been taught on the various

SJVC lists, the strengths may be judged as follows:

 

Assuming that we are trying to decide who rules Aquarius out of Saturn and

Rahu, the following is the procedure:

 

a) If both are in the Same sign, it doesn't matter. The counting will be

upto that house anyway.

b) If one is in Aquarius, while the other is not, the other is automatically

considered to be the stronger Lord.

c) If neither are in Aquarius, then you go through the following:

 

*If one is associated with more planets than the other, he is the stronger.

If they're both equal:

 

*Check out who aspects (rasi aspects) the two. Jupiter, Mercury and the

dispositor (even if it is Jup or Merc) all are worth a point let's say. The

one who gets more points is stronger. If they're equal:

 

*If one is exalted he is stronger. Or if one is debilitated, he is weaker.

Still equals? Carry on...

 

*The one in a stronger sign is stronger. Duals are stronger than fixed, and

fixed are stronger than Movables.

 

*The planet who gives more years in the Rashi Dashas is taken to be

stronger.

 

*The planet who has a higher longitude is stronger.

 

(When thinking of Rahu or Ketu, take this from the end of the sign.)

 

If we're judging for Scorpio, we follow the same procedure, but with Mars

and Ketu, instead of Rahu and Saturn. So if we now look at Susan Birr's

chart, we see that the Lagna is Scorpio, and therefore the stronger Lord has

to be found for deciding the Arudha Lagna.

 

Neither Mars nor Ketu are in Sc.

Neither associate with any planets.

Ma is aspected (sign aspects) by Jup and dispositor Venus.

Ke is aspected by Mercury, and Dispositor Merc (This is taken as two

different aspects).

Neither are exalted or debilitated.

Ketu is in a dual sign, Mars is in a fixed sign.

 

So, Ketu emerges as the stronger. If we now find the Arudha Lagna, using

Ketu as Lagna Lord, We get Cancer as the AL, with Venus in it, in exact

sextile to Neptune. Makes sense.

 

Hope it's helped,

 

Pursottam

[Guest guest]

Thank you again Chris, for explaing again the correct way to figure

those out, they sure are hard to understand though, Angie

[Guest guest]

Pursottam wrote

===============

Assuming that we are trying to decide who rules Aquarius out of Saturn and

Rahu, the following is the procedure:

===============

 

Hello Pursottam,

 

I'm just curious Pursottam where the scriptural reference is for this?

Certainly Rahu and Ketu are given co-rulership of Aquarius and Scorpio

respectively, but I can't see the nodes ever taking precedence (in any

circumstances) over the major planets, SA & MA.

 

I've also seen posts where AtmaKaraka status is given to the nodes. This, I

feel, is attributing a status to them that they don't legitimately have. You

say that your Guru teaches this, but is there any scriptural reference?

 

Regards

Wendy

[Guest guest]

Om Krishnaaya Namah

 

Hi Wendy,

 

Thanks for your email.

 

> I'm just curious Pursottam where the scriptural reference is for this?

> Certainly Rahu and Ketu are given co-rulership of Aquarius and Scorpio

> respectively, but I can't see the nodes ever taking precedence (in any

> circumstances) over the major planets, SA & MA.

 

I don't usually give the nodes precedence when analysing them as the Lords

of houses. So if Scorpio was the seventh, I'd give weight to Mars rather

than Saturn when analysing marital matters. But, there are scriptural

references which recommend that the nodes take precedence in certain

techniques, most notably in the calculation of Arudhas and Rashi Dashas:

 

"If a planet owns two signs or if a sign is owned by two planets, then O

Brahmana, the Pada should be calculated on the basis of the stronger sign

and stronger Lord." (BPHS 29:7)

 

"Scorpio is Lorded by two planets, Mars and Ketu, while Aquarius is ruled by

Saturn and Rahu. O Brahmana, this must be borne is mind."

 

"Now I explain how to decide the Dasha length of the signs having two

Lords...(Parashara goes on to explain how to find the stronger of two

Lords)" (BPHS 46:157-158)

 

So, clearly there is a scriptural basis for taking the nodes to be the

stronger Lords under certain circumstances. However I once again stress that

in normal house to house judgement, usually Mars or Saturn will reflect the

prosperity of houses falling in Scorpio and Aquarius respectively, rather

than Ketu or Rahu. But in the use of Arudha's and Rashi Dashas, greater

accuracy is gained by applying these "nodal rules".

 

>

> I've also seen posts where AtmaKaraka status is given to the

> nodes. This, I

> feel, is attributing a status to them that they don't

> legitimately have. You

> say that your Guru teaches this, but is there any scriptural reference?

>

 

I can understand why you feel this way. It is rather shocking to think that

Rahu can ever become the indicator of one's soul and spiritual nature. I

have previously used the seven karaka scheme, and now use the eight karaka

scheme (which includes Rahu), and feel it offers greater accuracy. My Guru,

Robert Koch, also previously used the seven karaka scheme, but teaches that

the eight karaka scheme is more accurate. And his Guru Sanjay Rath, also

advocates the eight karaka scheme. As regards scriptural references, here we

go:

 

"Some astrologers have adopted the seven chara karaka scheme, in which the

Matri karaka and Putra karaka are merged." (Jaimini Sutras 1:1:19)

 

(Implying that Jaimini Himself disagrees)

 

"I now explain the atma etc. karakas. There are seven from the Sun to

Saturn, or eight from the Sun to Rahu. Some say that if two planets have

equal longitudes, then only should Rahu be considered in the scheme. This

scheme has seven planets. However, some say that there are eight planets,

including Rahu regardless of the situation of the other planets." (BPHS

32:1-2)

 

(Here Parashara doesn't offer his opinion. But He acknowledges that this is

a very old debate.)

 

"O Best of the Brahmanas, the planet after the Atmakaraka is called the

Amatya karaka. That next to the Amatya karaka is the Bhratri karaka. That

next to the Bhratri karaka is the Matri karaka. That next to the Matri

karaka is the Pitri karaka, and then there is the Putra karaka. After that

there is the Jnati karaka, and then, without doubt we have the Dara karaka."

(BPHS 32:13-14)

 

In this verse, it is clear that Parashara Himself favours the eight

chara-karaka scheme in which Rahu is included. Rahu as the AK is a bit

difficult to digest, but considering that Lord Vishnu Himself, as Mohini

Murti, gave Rahu "the chop" perhaps does mean that sometimes Rahu can be

spiritual (as he is blessed by "dying" at the hands of God Himself). Very

often it is found that if Rahu is AK (after his longitude is subtracted from

thirty), the person does turn out to be very spiritually inclined. Of

course, this should be supported in the rest of the chart.

 

Hope it helps,

 

Pursottam

[Guest guest]

Hi, thanks, I didn't know there were two rulers for Scorpio and

Aquarius. I was trying to figure out my own rulerships, but got stuck,

are the nodes exalted in Libra and Capricorn like Saturn and Mars?

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Om Krishnaaya Namah

 

Hi Angie,

 

> Hi, thanks, I didn't know there were two rulers for Scorpio and

> Aquarius. I was trying to figure out my own rulerships, but got stuck,

> are the nodes exalted in Libra and Capricorn like Saturn and Mars?

> Angie

>

 

Sorry, I missed your mail somehow! The exaltation signs of the nodes are

very controversial and practically every classic and every modern book

offers different suggestions, sometimes even contradictory. This perhaps

just goes to show that the nodes never act weak and debilitated in the same

way as other planets. There is always something strange and unexpected when

it comes to the mischievous demon! I suggest that you try taking Gemini to

be the exaltation and debilitation sign of Rahu and Ketu respectively.

Similarly, take Sagittarius to be Rahu's debilitation and Ketu's exaltation.

This is what I was taught

and it seems to work.

 

Good Luck!

 

Pursottam

[Guest guest]

Thank you Pursottam, Angie