Guest guest Posted October 8, 2001 Report Share Posted October 8, 2001 Robert mentioned an SA principle which might suggest Jupiter as very Malefic for Cancer Lagna: As far as Jupiter being the most malefic planet for Cancer Lagna, I can say I have seen a number of charts of persons with Cancer rising and Jupiter in the first. These persons were all not surprisingly either successful doctors, lawyers, or Gurus. One of them is Srila Sridhar Maharaj, my own Diksha Guru, who lived into his nineties, and was never harmed in his life in any way, who was full of knowledge, graceful, loved and highly learned. If Jupiter was a malefic at all, he would not have had the exceptional life he had, as the rest of his chart is unimpressive. He was Jupiter, or Guru, completely, all the way. He was a very recognized Guru worldwide, and his purity has never been questioned by anyone. The rule didn't work AT ALL in his case, and I know of a handful of others. I personally am no longer getting alerted to any action by the teachings that come and go from various teachers who make one or a certain set of techniques seem more important than other standard parts of the science. I have in my 8 years in this field seen various teachers and techniques come and go. I saw one person make a certain technique VERY popular just because in one chart it hit a certain thing on the nose. This is not scientific. I saw an ayanamsa become popular due to it working for a few charts one time for one person- from there it spread worldwide. I couldn't believe it. One way I look at things is to look at the quality of the individuals who become the main promoters of the thing, their appearances, lifestyles, sadhana, charts, and so on. This is often telling as to what Guna the technique resonates with. Every once in awhile, a follower of any system will hit some prediction on the nose. That doesn't really prove anything. I hope those with scientific minds can weed out the misunderstandings. Even sometimes Western Astrologers make correct predictions. This proves nothing. It's important to try to remain scientific in this science. To believe something is a real system that works, takes alot of proving over time, and the proving must outweight the misses. I know for sure this is not done by anyone of any system. There simply is a lack of documented studies to date in this field. On remaining scientific: Once we were talking about "Do the nodes cast trinal aspects", and Robert pointed out that trines are also navamsas. This is a basic thing that everyone a little deep in the science should understand. This puts a whole different idea behind trinal aspects, ie, that all planets "affect" their trines by being in a certain Navamsa sign, and if you count the other vargas similarly, eventually you end up seeing various points of influence. Remember too the general rule of trines and squares from any planet being aspected generally by their lesser strength aspects as listed in BPHS. That kind of thing is often overlooked. Sometimes I see people making alot out of things and in so doing show basic misunderstandings of astronomy and the timing, distance, aspectual or counting cycles of things in this science. There is so much in basic Parashari Jyotish that is not used, and which is loaded with power. Often to stand out in India, people have to do various "new" things to get noticed. There are alot of astrologers there, so if you want to stand out, you have to write books or do something which makes your name rise above others. Sometimes some stresses that reach our ears are derived from the persons own needs, or career push, and not so much other sources. I am not saying this directly about Mr Choudry. Not at all. I am just speaking generally to educate those who may be less aware of these matters than myself. Although I have the books and have heard of it in general, I have no detailed knowledge nor opinion of SA. I was alerted to the point I made above re Jupiter/Cancer only by Robert's posting on same. I am personally still very overwhelmed by the vastness of the basic Parashari Jyotish, which I am still overwhelmed with trying to do justice to through programming it into software. In other words, I don't personally need more! Besides SA, KP, and other more popular sub systems which come and go, you can take my word on it that there are many other things people think of and send to me as the one and all greatest thing out. The other day a person totally serious, claiming to be fully enlightened, told me he had intuited a certain system. He expected me and others to program it as standard. I get that kind of thing quite often. It made no apparent sense to me at all, and I know astronomical and other things fairly well. He even went so far as to say that we had mis programmed our softwares (not only me) because we did not have this thing in our programs already. Personally when I look in retrospect, I see that basics are often fine in explaining things. In my life this is quite true. Most of the main events in my life are explainable by my basic placements, dashas and transits. I have one of the conditional dashas applying to me. That's the one for if you have lord of the 7th in the first. This dasha goes by the days of the week, and all the lengths are the same. If you study it, you realize that this placement rather heavily alters one's karma. It's an important placement therefore. It makes the Navamsa more important as it relates to 7th house matters. One realizes that the number 9 becomes more important here, as 9 is Navams, and only through fortune does one get anything, especially spouses or other types of partners. That dasha system puts me in quite a different dasha than the other major systems put me in, and it explains a few things that I experience. So in basic Parashari teachings, there are many gems not yet uncovered by the mass of us in the West. I only want to point this out in prudence before rushing to add more to the pile to look into. I guess my Guru in DharmaBhava makes me a bit of a stickler for sticking to tradition first. I guess I just wanted to chat. Thanks for listening. Just a servant, -- Das Goravani 2852 Willamette St # 353 Eugene OR USA 97405 or Fax: 541-343-0344 "Goravani Jyotish" Vedic/Hindu Astrology Software Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2001 Report Share Posted October 8, 2001 Dear Das I agree with most of your posting although I would encourage newcomers to learn SA as it does give you an assessment of charts in a snapshot .The members on the SA list are actually out there making predictions (as demonstrated by Neville's hit) whereas in many other lists the discussion does not get much past theoretical frameworks . That said most of the senior members of SA have felt the need to incorporate additional techniques . In SA Jupiter is not the most malefic planet for Cancer but is considered malefic because its moolatrikona sign is the 6th . However in HH Sridhar Swami's case it was obviously acting more as the Lord of the 9th than 6th and this is an exceptional case . The ability to identify the exceptions is one thing that makes astrology a challenging science . It maybe why traditional astrogers had an ishita deva (worshippable deity ) because cookbook formulas do not work in every case .I think Hart de Fowe has also advised his students to not worry too much about the exceptions in the early stages .When one has thouroughly grasped the fundamentals then that is the time to look at the exceptions . Could you please forward me HH Sridhar Maharaja's birth details Nicholas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2001 Report Share Posted October 8, 2001 Robert, Das and All: I agree that SA is well worth learning but it is not really the holy grail as far as astrology goes. I totally agree with Das that it making one accurate prediction doesn't necessary prove the techniques used as correct. In fact, if you look at Lang's prediction, there isn't a lot there that is SA, only the point about a couple of transits to the MEP of the 8th house. This was pointed out by the former president of SA, Ron Grimes, who has now left the list to start his own. Chris At 01:10 PM 10/8/01 -0700, you wrote: > >Robert mentioned an SA principle which might suggest Jupiter as very >Malefic for Cancer Lagna: > >As far as Jupiter being the most malefic planet for Cancer Lagna, I can >say I have seen a number of charts of persons with Cancer rising and >Jupiter in the first. > >These persons were all not surprisingly either successful doctors, >lawyers, or Gurus. One of them is Srila Sridhar Maharaj, my own Diksha >Guru, who lived into his nineties, and was never harmed in his life in >any way, who was full of knowledge, graceful, loved and highly learned. >If Jupiter was a malefic at all, he would not have had the exceptional >life he had, as the rest of his chart is unimpressive. He was Jupiter, >or Guru, completely, all the way. He was a very recognized Guru >worldwide, and his purity has never been questioned by anyone. The rule >didn't work AT ALL in his case, and I know of a handful of others. > >I personally am no longer getting alerted to any action by the teachings >that come and go from various teachers who make one or a certain set of >techniques seem more important than other standard parts of the science. >I have in my 8 years in this field seen various teachers and techniques >come and go. > >I saw one person make a certain technique VERY popular just because in >one chart it hit a certain thing on the nose. This is not scientific. I >saw an ayanamsa become popular due to it working for a few charts one >time for one person- from there it spread worldwide. I couldn't believe >it. > >One way I look at things is to look at the quality of the individuals >who become the main promoters of the thing, their appearances, >lifestyles, sadhana, charts, and so on. This is often telling as to what >Guna the technique resonates with. > >Every once in awhile, a follower of any system will hit some prediction >on the nose. That doesn't really prove anything. I hope those with >scientific minds can weed out the misunderstandings. Even sometimes >Western Astrologers make correct predictions. This proves nothing. > >It's important to try to remain scientific in this science. To believe >something is a real system that works, takes alot of proving over time, >and the proving must outweight the misses. I know for sure this is not >done by anyone of any system. There simply is a lack of documented >studies to date in this field. > >On remaining scientific: Once we were talking about "Do the nodes cast >trinal aspects", and Robert pointed out that trines are also navamsas. >This is a basic thing that everyone a little deep in the science should >understand. This puts a whole different idea behind trinal aspects, ie, >that all planets "affect" their trines by being in a certain Navamsa >sign, and if you count the other vargas similarly, eventually you end up >seeing various points of influence. Remember too the general rule of >trines and squares from any planet being aspected generally by their >lesser strength aspects as listed in BPHS. > >That kind of thing is often overlooked. Sometimes I see people making >alot out of things and in so doing show basic misunderstandings of >astronomy and the timing, distance, aspectual or counting cycles of >things in this science. > >There is so much in basic Parashari Jyotish that is not used, and which >is loaded with power. Often to stand out in India, people have to do >various "new" things to get noticed. There are alot of astrologers >there, so if you want to stand out, you have to write books or do >something which makes your name rise above others. Sometimes some >stresses that reach our ears are derived from the persons own needs, or >career push, and not so much other sources. > >I am not saying this directly about Mr Choudry. Not at all. I am just >speaking generally to educate those who may be less aware of these >matters than myself. Although I have the books and have heard of it in >general, I have no detailed knowledge nor opinion of SA. I was alerted >to the point I made above re Jupiter/Cancer only by Robert's posting on same. > >I am personally still very overwhelmed by the vastness of the basic >Parashari Jyotish, which I am still overwhelmed with trying to do >justice to through programming it into software. In other words, I don't >personally need more! Besides SA, KP, and other more popular sub systems >which come and go, you can take my word on it that there are many other >things people think of and send to me as the one and all greatest thing out. > >The other day a person totally serious, claiming to be fully >enlightened, told me he had intuited a certain system. He expected me >and others to program it as standard. I get that kind of thing quite >often. It made no apparent sense to me at all, and I know astronomical >and other things fairly well. He even went so far as to say that we had >mis programmed our softwares (not only me) because we did not have this >thing in our programs already. > >Personally when I look in retrospect, I see that basics are often fine >in explaining things. In my life this is quite true. Most of the main >events in my life are explainable by my basic placements, dashas and transits. > >I have one of the conditional dashas applying to me. That's the one for >if you have lord of the 7th in the first. This dasha goes by the days of >the week, and all the lengths are the same. If you study it, you realize >that this placement rather heavily alters one's karma. It's an important >placement therefore. It makes the Navamsa more important as it relates >to 7th house matters. One realizes that the number 9 becomes more >important here, as 9 is Navams, and only through fortune does one get >anything, especially spouses or other types of partners. That dasha >system puts me in quite a different dasha than the other major systems >put me in, and it explains a few things that I experience. > >So in basic Parashari teachings, there are many gems not yet uncovered >by the mass of us in the West. I only want to point this out in prudence >before rushing to add more to the pile to look into. I guess my Guru in >DharmaBhava makes me a bit of a stickler for sticking to tradition first. > >I guess I just wanted to chat. Thanks for listening. > >Just a servant, >-- > > >Das Goravani > > > > > > >2852 Willamette St # 353 >Eugene OR USA 97405 > > or >Fax: 541-343-0344 > >"Goravani Jyotish" >Vedic/Hindu Astrology Software > > >gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.