Can we justify aspects in varga charts of Vedic Astrology?

[Guest guest]

:

Subject:

Can we justify aspects in varga charts of Vedic Astrology?

Until now I have not bothered myself to find out whether there are

contradictions in the written literature of Vedic Astrology. The reason for this

nonchalant attitude was the assumption that the very planets that signify good

tidings will also signify bad indications, depending upon how the planets are

linked to the various matters, the various portfolios of human life. So,

contradictions become subjective to the native, depending on what the native

considers good or bad. As an example, my father left our birthplace in India

when I was 18 months old. He went to Singapore(it was pre-world war II times)

where he had made his fortune before he married my mother, and I was born as the

first offspring. He was financially hard up when I was born. He (my father) knew

that he could land his old job in Singapore, where he was well paid. World war

II broke out, Singapore was a favored Japanese strategic target, all whereabouts

of my father along with several of his friends were all lost without a trace. I

have no recollection of my fathers face or any memories of him.

Those of you dabble in both, Western as well as Eastern astrology, know that

aspects are one issue on which the two systems differ fundamentally.The reason

why I took an example from my birth chart was to illustrate that an aspect in

the birth chart modifies even an unoccupied zodiac sign, a postulate only

Vedic Astrology makes. I have researched other cases which also seem to

substantiate this dictum.

Those of you who have access to Goravani Jyothish may cast my chart

for11/04/1936, TOB 1:40: AM, Trichur, India. In my birth chart, five out of the

nine Vedic astrology planets aspect my 9th House, somewhat of a rare aspectual

concentration on a single House. Four out of the five are malefic planets. The

dictum that a glance from Jupiter will eliminate a thousand evils did not work

for me, at least about my father, because the 5th aspect of the benefic Jupiter

falls on the 9th House too. Looking back on my own life, my 9th House succumbed

to the evil forces it was subjected to, with respect to the experience I had

about my father. But overall, for myself, the 9th House considered as a House of

luck or fortune, I was rather blessed in the ambitions I had entertained in life

compared to my rather low birth (only financially) surroundings. Thus, the

science of astrology in fact allows for what are seemingly apparent

contradictions, but these are contradictions resulting from differences in

subjective interpretations, rather than those inherent in astrological dictums.

I give my life experience here because it convinces me how aspects to an empty

rasi (unoccupied by any planet) in a birth chart can have meaningful impacts on

those matters in the native‘s life, signified by that rasi. However, when I come

to aspects in amsa charts (also called varga charts) in Vedic Astrology, I am a

little lost about its significance in the astrological literature.

In general, most writings in Vedic Astrology literature allow for the

existence of aspects in amsa charts. If one accepts that aspects (both in

Western as well in Eastern Astrology there seems to exist this acceptance)

result from some particular geometrical angular relationships between planets,

then it is difficult to see how in Parasara designed amsa charts one can

meaningfully assign aspects. When a planet is transplanted from its rasi

position in a birth chart(where in fact it is there in real time) to another

Zodiac House in an amsa chart, this planet looses its longitudinal identity

which characterized it in the birth chart.

Varga charts were introduced by Sage Parasara to fine tune the astrological

judgment of certain matters in the native's life. The Sage declares their

function in his book, albeit briefly but in no uncertain terms, in his

introduction to vargavivekadhiaya. Parasara‘s justification for the creation of

the varga charts is based on his postulate that planets which have the common

lordship over a rasi, for example Mars over Mesha(Aries) and Vrischika(Scorpio)

are not necessarily the supreme rulers of the various amsas (fractions) within

the thirty degree span of the same rasis. Thus, while Mars rules the whole of

Mesha in general, Mars has some added rulership-right on the first Navamsha of

Mesha(0-3°20‘) compared to the rest of 8 Navamshas of Mesha. The remaining 8

Navamshas may be considered to be leased, (figuratively speaking!) by Mars from

other planets, giving him the general rulership all over Mesha, while on the

first Navamsha Mars is the absolute territorial lord. Such considerations form

the basis of the origin of an amsa chart, requiring the placement of a planet

within 0-3°20‘ of Mesha in a birth chart in Mesha itself in the Navamsha chart,

while a planet that is occupying a longitude 3°20' 6°40‘ in Mesha is

placed in Vrisha(Taurus). The different arrangement of planets in the amsa chart

from that of the birth chart is to be used to get a better glimpse of the

indications of the native's life, but only when judging those matters laid down

by the originator of the amsa chart. Thus, Navamsha for marriage or

partnerships, Dasamsa for career etc;

In time various post-Parasara writings have accumulated paving a way for two

distinct line of thoughts. 1) When the amsa chart is to be interpreted there is

no need to pay attention to those aspects in birth chart, obviously they(those

aspects which were in the birth chart) may indeed be non existent in the

amsa chart, 2) Planets in Amsa charts develop drishtis (aspects) under the same

Parasara rules as in birth chart. Example, all oppositions in a varga chart have

the same meaning as in rasi chart, the special aspects of Jupiter, Mars, and

Saturn are applicable to the amsa charts the same way it is applied to rasi

chart.

I find two problems with the above concept.

1) A whole chapter in Parasara Hora has been devoted to drikbala of planets.

Those of you click through GJ need not be told that drikbala is an important

attribute of planetary shadbala strength. The starting point of the math for

evaluation of drikbala function is the longitude of planets. Is it not clear

that the drikbala is aspectual strength? If there is no longitudinal identity,

and consequently no angular relationship can be attributed between planets in an

amsa chart, does it not make aspect and aspectual strength a foregone conclusion

in amsa charts? One has to remember that when a planet is in Thula(Libra) and

another one is in Mesha in Navamsha chart, they are there in those respective

rasis because those planets occupied (in the birth chart) segments ruled by

Venus and Mars, the lords of Thula and Mesha respectively. Such a relationship

originates in the amsa lordship between segments of a given rasi, it has got

nothing to do with any angular relationship between planets existing at the time

of birth. Therefore, there is no justification to consider that these planets

are in opposition in the same sense as they will be in rasi, if they are

similarly placed.

2) Nowhere do I see aspect in varga charts explicitly mentioned in Parasara

Hora.(see the exception in Karakamsha charts mentioned below). In the chapter

where the Sage mentions vimshopaka strength of planets (amsa charts do play a

big role here) he makes no mention of aspects, while exaltation(ucha) and own

house(swakhetram) are given appropriate considerations. Am I to suppose that the

Muni who carefully laid down precise mathematical rules to apportion aspectual

strengths in shadbala made an inadvertent omission in vimshopaka?

There is, however, a chapter in Hora sastra that mentions a general aspect,

one that is not tied up in a longitudinal link on the zodiac. In this

chapter(chapter 9) there is a mention of aspects of signs. The opposite signs

and the planets contained within opposing signs are considered to be aspecting

each other, in addition to a certain other combinations that gives fractional

aspects. Thus, when the term sputadrishti(an aspect characterized by a

longitude in the zodiac) is used, it becomes necessary to distinguish it from

another kind of drishti, one that is not associated with sputam(longitude). May

be one can claim that the later kind of aspect is the one Sage Parasara is

referring to in Karakamsha chart, when the Sage uses the term

''Yutekshithe'' (to mean conjunct or aspected ). By and large in

astrological applications these general aspects (mentioned in chapter 9) are

ignored. When aspects are mentioned in modern writings, almost invariably, the

author implies aspects that modify planetary attributes by divination or

karakatwas of aspecting and aspected planets. Such aspects are the ones between

planets in oppositions, or the special aspects of outer planets and Mars. Such

aspects can be meaningfully implicated only with their longitudinal identity, a

parameter not existing in amsa charts.

Thus, when Parasara uses the word "yutekshite " as he does in the many

verses in the chapter on Karakamsha in his monumental work, Hora Sastra, a

distinction has to made by the readers between such drishti and those discussed

in the birth chart. The later ones are the only aspects that results in

drikbala. The one in amsa charts are supposed to be the ones, or those like the

ones, mentioned in chapter 9. The aspects that quantitatively modifies the

properties and significations by imparting characteristics of the aspecting and

aspected planets are always the ones that arise out of a defined geometrical

configuration. Such aspects cannot be existing in amsa charts unless the design

framework of amsa charts are modified from that laid down by Sage Parasara.

Therefore, the total of 16 vargas giving rise to 144 aspects (not counting

special aspects of outer planets) does seem to be an unnecessary complication

that is not warranted by the definition of aspects resulting in drikbala. Those

aspects which do not have aspectual strengths obviously cannot be equated on the

same par to those whose aspectual strength can be quantified. Many writings in

Vedic Astrology, dating back even to the beginning of the 19th century, make no

distinction between an aspect in the birth chart and that in an amsa chart.

I do not mean to implicate that because there is not a longitudinal identity

there is no planetary interaction in a varga chart between planets. My reasoning

on aspects is exclusive of the relative ease or difficulty of interaction

between planets when they are in 1:9 and a 1:8 rasi position with respect to one

another. Such positional identities do not need an angular arc, described by

degree min second to define their position

By assigning meaningful aspects in amsa chart one actually begins to open a

whole can of worms. In some amsa charts, especially in those of smaller

fractional values, one starts to see the Moon's two nodes lumped together in a

single sign. How can one imagibe or justify a Rahu falling out of of aspect from

Ketu? In Parasara's Hora chart (the fractional basis of Hora chart is

fifteen degrees, half of a sign) all planets have to line up in either

Cancer or Leo. Is it that in Hora chart, aspects between planets can be

ignored, or they do not exist there, but in all other amsa charts aspects are

meaningful? Vedic classics texts do mention that strengths of Yogas are

inversely dependant on the inter-planetary distance within a sign.

Lot of post parasara writings speak about Yogas in amsa charts. How do these

authors assign orbs, and consequently strength of Yogas when planets are

conjunct in amsa chart signs?

In the absence of written word from the Sage who originated the amsa chart,

one has only common sense to guide him through. My common sense does see a

necessity for longitude to justify aspect in meaningful fashion, for aspect that

cannot be quantitatively ascertained has to be considered as an inferior

parameter to sputadrishti which can be quantitatively assessed. In my

experience, it is not only unjustified to treat aspects in amsa charts the same

way as one treats it in birth chart, but also leaving out aspects from

amsa charts do not take away any of the thunder out of any predictions in

Vedic Astrology. I hope to hear from those of you who enjoy clicking through the

invaluable gift bestowed on us by Das Goravani. Happy clicking!,

--- Kuttikkat Chandrabose

--- kuttikkatbose

--- EarthLink: It‘s your Internet.

 

 

 

--- Kuttikkat Chandrabose

 

--- kuttikkatbose

 

--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Kuttikkat, Visti, das goravani and list members,

 

>Can we justify aspects in varga charts of Vedic Astrology?

 

Yes. I think that the planetary aspects in amsa charts can be justified

very easily. This can be done within the framework of Parashari principles.

 

>Until now I have not bothered myself to find out whether there are

>contradictions in the written literature of Vedic Astrology.

 

The apparent contradictions may be because we don't see the astrology as

the ancient sages saw. The main reason, however, is the lack of sufficient

amount of research in the field.

 

>However, when I come to aspects in amsa charts (also called varga charts)

>in Vedic Astrology, I am a little lost about its significance in the

>astrological literature. In general, most writings

>in Vedic Astrology literature allow for the

>existence of aspects in amsa charts.

 

Amsas (fragments) are clearly a fine-tuning/redefinition/re-fragmentation

of "longitudinal rulership"(also called kshetra of a planet), as dictated by

rashis' at the broadest level.

The rashis' are the "longitudinal rulerships" given to various planets with

a fixed starting point at 00 00' aries.

This cannot be changed. Similarly, in amsa charts the "longitudinal

rulerships" are fixed.

Also, the significance of each amsa chart is fixed according to the number

of divisions of a rashi one does.

The maximum number of divisions of a single rashi being also fixed.

 

>If one accepts that aspects (both in Western as well in Eastern Astrology

>there seems to exist this acceptance)

>result from some particular geometrical angular relationships between

>planets,

>then it is difficult to see how in Parasara designed amsa charts one can

>meaningfully assign aspects. When a planet is transplanted from its rasi

>position in a birth chart(where in fact it is there in real time) to

>another

>Zodiac House in an amsa chart, this planet looses its longitudinal identity

>which characterized it in the birth chart.

 

The problem here is that you want to associate "longitudinal identity" to

planets in amsa charts to assign "aspects" to planets (in amsa charts)

because Parashara defined "aspects" in terms of "longitudinal difference"

and didn't specify where to use them (in amsa charts or rashi chart).

Definitely, there is no longitudinal identity associated with a planet in

amsha charts and therefore those seeming contradictions (Rahu-Ketu sitting

together).

And thus there is no point of using same aspects for planets in amsa charts

as those derived for the natal chart

using longitudinal identity of planets (i.e. 7th for all and 4,8th for Mars,

5,9th for Jupiter and 3,10th for Saturn).

 

The obvious question is then how else to do it for amsa charts if no

longitudinal identity is preserved in calculating their amsas?

Well, the answer lies in the derivation of the amsa charts itself. (I will

take the examples of 7th planetary aspect for different amsa charts only.

You can try out for other special aspects.)

 

Take the example of D-3 for natal chart of aries lagna. In this chart

aries is divided into three drekkana (aries, leo, sagittarius),

each drekkana having a 10 degree longitudinal extent. Thus planets placed in

it have longitudinal identity until it is removed

from the natal chart and put in D-3 chart. NOTE that planets don't lose

their identity just by assignment of drekkana division but in the process

of putting them in D-3 chart (which involves placing the planets in their

respective drekkana in D-3 and involves shifting of their rashi position

from natal position).

 

Consider, Venus at 2 degree aries in this natal chart. Clearly, it is

aspecting the 2 degree Libra in natal chart.

In fact, it is placed in aries drekkana in 1st house and aspecting Libra

drekkana in 7th house of natal chart.

 

Even though the mathematical process of calculating planetary positions

for D-charts results in a loss of longitudinal identity of planets,

it is still aspecting the "same longitude" in natal chart and thus the

corresponding amsa (drekkana) in amsa chart D-3.

If the longitudinal position of the Venus is translated from natal chart to

divisional chart, then the longitudinal position of its aspect must also be

translated properly.

And this is what seems to be most logical when looking at the calculations

of planetary bala, positions and aspects which are so much based on

longitudinal identity of planets.

I will say, "The planet has done nothing, its we who are trying to do

something to it. And we have not been doing our job sincerely."

NOTE:- if we consider that a planet in a certain rashi aspects a full rashi

i.e. whole 30 degree then it will translate to aspecting all the rashis' in

some of the divisional charts. This would be an illogical thing.

 

Placement of a planet in D-3 remains same in 3 cases. For Venus in above

example,

in 1st house of Aries in First drekkana (which is aries drekkana),

in 5th house of Leo in third drekkana (which is aries drekkana) or

in 9th house of Sagittarius in 2nd drekkana (which is again aries

drekkana).

Similarly, in other regular amsa charts, say D-9, there are 9 such

positions which map to same navamsha in D-9.

 

NOTE:- Calculating as above, an interesting thing for D-3 chart is that all

the planetary aspects (including special aspects of Saturn, Mars and Jupiter

in natal chart) translate to same aspects in D-3 chart.

However, same is not true for other amsa charts and thus not all Parashari

aspects derived through longitudinal position of a planet in natal chart are

valid for all amsa charts.

In fact, it turns out that for some divisional charts another set of special

aspects appear, which is in fact only a translation of the special aspect of

the planet in the natal chart to the divisional chart.

For example, the 5th and 9th aspects of Jupiter in natal chart translate to

1st aspect in D-9.

the 4th and 8th aspects of Mars in natal chart translate to 4th

aspect in D-9.

the 3rd and 10th aspects of Saturn in natal chart translate to

7th and 10th aspects respectively in D-9.

the 7th aspect of all planets in natal chart is preserved in

D-9.

I will emphasise the point that even though new aspects are created for some

of the divisional charts, they remain limited to that divisional chart only

and have no significance and no identity oustide that divisional chart.

I will take example of D-9 chart.

 

Consider a D-9 chart with natal chart of aries lagna. Consider Jupiter at 2

degree in aries lagna.

This Jupiter in 2 degree (aries navamsha) of aries rashi aspects

2 degree of (again aries navamasha) Leo rashi and----------- (5th

aspect calculated through Parashari rules),

2 degree of (Libra navamsha) Libra rashi ---------------------(7th

aspect " " " " ),

2 degree of (again aries navamasha) Sagittarius rashi.--------(9th

aspect " " " " ).

Therefore, in D-9 chart the translated position of Jupiter is

----- aries navamsha

and translated aspects are 7th and 1st (I wonder if this should be

considered as an aspect at all!!!)

 

For dasmamsa D-10 chart, the 7th aspect of planets in natal chart are

translated as is.

 

Far more interesting results emerge when considering Trimsamsa chart. This

can be seen easily using the same method of translation of longitude-based

aspects.

The 7th planetary aspect translates to 1st planetary aspect in trimsamsa.

Much more interesting things happen to special aspects of outer planets.

In trimsamsa, 10th aspect of Saturn, and 4th and 8th aspects of Mars of

natal chart are translated according to the longitude and rashi in which

they are sitting.

10th aspect of Saturn --- at 1-5 degree aries --- translates

to 2nd aspect in trimsamsa i.e. at taurus trimsamsa.

 

D-2 Chart:-

Its interesting to see that when we consider the Parashari aspects

calculated for natal chart to remain valid in D-2, the planets in the same

hora aspect each other with their 7th aspect and not the planets in

different horas.

NOTE that Surya Hora and Chandra Hora in D-2 are not opposing horas as is

clearly demonstrated by considering the Parashari aspects in the natal chart

as above.

 

Similarly, the translated 7th aspects and special aspects of planets for

different divisional charts can be found.

 

Finally, its not a simple juggling with longitudes and thus with aspects.

Actually, the longitudes of planets are

given greatest importance by Parashara as is evident in bala, aspect and

amsa calculations.

 

 

>Varga charts were introduced by Sage Parasara to fine tune the astrological

>judgment of certain matters in the native's life. The Sage declares their

>function in his book, albeit briefly but in no uncertain terms, in his

>introduction to vargavivekadhiaya.

>Parasara‘s justification for the creation of

>the varga charts is based on his postulate that planets which have the

>common

>lordship over a rasi, for example Mars over Mesha(Aries) and

>Vrischika(Scorpio)

>are not necessarily the supreme rulers of the various amsas (fractions)

>within

>the thirty degree span of the same rasis. Thus, while Mars rules the whole

>of

>Mesha in general, Mars has some added rulership-right on the first Navamsha

>of

>Mesha(0-3°20‘) compared to the rest of 8 Navamshas of Mesha. The remaining

>8

>Navamshas may be considered to be leased, (figuratively speaking!) by Mars

>from

>other planets, giving him the general rulership all over Mesha, while on

>the

>first Navamsha Mars is the absolute territorial lord. Such considerations

>form

>the basis of the origin of an amsa chart, requiring the placement of a

>planet

>within 0-3°20‘ of Mesha in a birth chart in Mesha itself in the Navamsha

>chart,

>while a planet that is occupying a longitude 3°20' 6°40‘ in Mesha is

>placed in Vrisha(Taurus).

 

I agree with you over this.

 

>In time various post-Parasara writings have accumulated paving a way for

>two

>distinct line of thoughts. 1) When the amsa chart is to be interpreted

>there is

>no need to pay attention to those aspects in birth chart, obviously

>they(those

>aspects which were in the birth chart) may indeed be non existent in the

>amsa chart, 2) Planets in Amsa charts develop drishtis (aspects) under the

>same

>Parasara rules as in birth chart. Example, all oppositions in a varga chart

>have

>the same meaning as in rasi chart, the special aspects of Jupiter, Mars,

>and

>Saturn are applicable to the amsa charts the same way it is applied to rasi

>chart.

>I find two problems with the above concept.

>1) A whole chapter in Parasara Hora has been devoted to drikbala of

>planets.

>Those of you click through GJ need not be told that drikbala is an

>important

>attribute of planetary shadbala strength. The starting point of the math

>for

>evaluation of drikbala function is the longitude of planets. Is it not

>clear

>that the drikbala is aspectual strength? If there is no longitudinal

>identity,

>and consequently no angular relationship can be attributed between planets

>in an

>amsa chart, does it not make aspect and aspectual strength a foregone

>conclusion

>in amsa charts? One has to remember that when a planet is in Thula(Libra)

>and

>another one is in Mesha in Navamsha chart, they are there in those

>respective

>rasis because those planets occupied (in the birth chart) segments ruled by

>Venus and Mars, the lords of Thula and Mesha respectively. Such a

>relationship

>originates in the amsa lordship between segments of a given rasi, it has

>got

>nothing to do with any angular relationship between planets existing at the

>time

>of birth. Therefore, there is no justification to consider that these

>planets

>are in opposition in the same sense as they will be in rasi, if they are

>similarly placed.

>2) Nowhere do I see aspect in varga charts explicitly mentioned in Parasara

>Hora.(see the exception in Karakamsha charts mentioned below). In the

>chapter

>where the Sage mentions vimshopaka strength of planets (amsa charts do play

>a

>big role here) he makes no mention of aspects, while exaltation(ucha) and

>own

>house(swakhetram) are given appropriate considerations. Am I to suppose

>that the

>Muni who carefully laid down precise mathematical rules to apportion

>aspectual

>strengths in shadbala made an inadvertent omission in vimshopaka?

>There is, however, a chapter in Hora sastra that mentions a general aspect,

>one that is not tied up in a longitudinal link on the zodiac. In this

>chapter(chapter 9) there is a mention of aspects of signs. The opposite

>signs

>and the planets contained within opposing signs are considered to be

>aspecting

>each other, in addition to a certain other combinations that gives

>fractional

>aspects. Thus, when the term sputadrishti(an aspect characterized by a

>longitude in the zodiac) is used, it becomes necessary to distinguish it

>from

>another kind of drishti, one that is not associated with sputam(longitude).

>May

>be one can claim that the later kind of aspect is the one Sage Parasara is

>referring to in Karakamsha chart, when the Sage uses the term

>''Yutekshithe'' (to mean conjunct or aspected ). By and large in

>astrological applications these general aspects (mentioned in chapter 9)

>are

>ignored. When aspects are mentioned in modern writings, almost invariably,

>the

>author implies aspects that modify planetary attributes by divination or

>karakatwas of aspecting and aspected planets. Such aspects are the ones

>between

>planets in oppositions, or the special aspects of outer planets and Mars.

>Such

>aspects can be meaningfully implicated only with their longitudinal

>identity, a

>parameter not existing in amsa charts.

>Thus, when Parasara uses the word "yutekshite " as he does in the many

>verses in the chapter on Karakamsha in his monumental work, Hora Sastra, a

>distinction has to made by the readers between such drishti and those

>discussed

>in the birth chart. The later ones are the only aspects that results in

>drikbala. The one in amsa charts are supposed to be the ones, or those like

>the

>ones, mentioned in chapter 9. The aspects that quantitatively modifies the

>properties and significations by imparting characteristics of the aspecting

>and

>aspected planets are always the ones that arise out of a defined

>geometrical

>configuration. Such aspects cannot be existing in amsa charts unless the

>design

>framework of amsa charts are modified from that laid down by Sage Parasara.

>Therefore, the total of 16 vargas giving rise to 144 aspects (not counting

>special aspects of outer planets) does seem to be an unnecessary

>complication

>that is not warranted by the definition of aspects resulting in drikbala.

>Those

>aspects which do not have aspectual strengths obviously cannot be equated

>on the

>same par to those whose aspectual strength can be quantified. Many writings

>in

>Vedic Astrology, dating back even to the beginning of the 19th century,

>make no

>distinction between an aspect in the birth chart and that in an amsa chart.

>I do not mean to implicate that because there is not a longitudinal

>identity

>there is no planetary interaction in a varga chart between planets. My

>reasoning

>on aspects is exclusive of the relative ease or difficulty of interaction

>between planets when they are in 1:9 and a 1:8 rasi position with respect

>to one

>another. Such positional identities do not need an angular arc, described

>by

>degree min second to define their position

>By assigning meaningful aspects in amsa chart one actually begins to open a

>whole can of worms. In some amsa charts, especially in those of smaller

>fractional values, one starts to see the Moon's two nodes lumped together

>in a

>single sign. How can one imagibe or justify a Rahu falling out of of aspect

>from

>Ketu? In Parasara's Hora chart (the fractional basis of Hora chart is

>fifteen degrees, half of a sign) all planets have to line up in either

>Cancer or Leo. Is it that in Hora chart, aspects between planets can be

>ignored, or they do not exist there, but in all other amsa charts aspects

>are

>meaningful? Vedic classics texts do mention that strengths of Yogas are

>inversely dependant on the inter-planetary distance within a sign.

>Lot of post parasara writings speak about Yogas in amsa charts. How do

>these

>authors assign orbs, and consequently strength of Yogas when planets are

>conjunct in amsa chart signs?

 

All this supports the method of finding aspects in divisional charts

using the translation according to longitude.

 

>In the absence of written word from the Sage who originated the amsa chart,

>one has only common sense to guide him through. My common sense does see a

>necessity for longitude to justify aspect in meaningful fashion, for aspect

>that

>cannot be quantitatively ascertained has to be considered as an inferior

>parameter to sputadrishti which can be quantitatively assessed. In my

>experience, it is not only unjustified to treat aspects in amsa charts the

>same

>way as one treats it in birth chart, but also leaving out aspects from

>amsa charts do not take away any of the thunder out of any predictions in

>Vedic Astrology. I hope to hear from those of you who enjoy clicking

>through the

>invaluable gift bestowed on us by Das Goravani.

 

I hope I have been clear and concise in my explanation of planetary

aspects in divisional charts.

I have tried to use common-sense and logic. However, the real test can only

be done when this thing is proved with the real-life examples.

But as Jyotish is only a secondary thing for me, being a graduate in

computer science and engg., I would not be able to do the much needed

research

for the confirmation of the results through this proposed method. I hope

Jyotishis' out there are the most suitable people to do this task and will

do their part of contribution out of their interest and responsibility.

 

regards,

nitish

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp