Karmic Mixupof Das Goravani

[Guest guest]

Dear Das,

 

There seems to be confusion here. Yes, some charts are more 'representative' of

the persons life, I agree. But to say that a person born out of their supposed

'racial country' as being mixed up karmically, is not correct. Then to add that

homosexuals are then also "mixed up karmically" sounds extremely judgemental.

 

A person's life, whether living in a foriegn country or being gay, IS their

Karma playing out. They are the way they are BECAUSE OF the very

samskaras/vrittis that make up their Karma!!! So to judge their 'karma' due to

their external manifestations is very superficial in the 'face of the true ways

of universal karma'.

 

As far as charts/souls being more 'vedic karma compatible', this also seems to

be a misuse and misunderstanding of that now over-used term karma. Yes I agree

that some people gravitate to the themes of the Vedic life more easily, but a

good Jyotishee should be able to meet each unique client where THEY live, not

forcing them to see/appreciate/live in our Vedic paradigm. It is the duty of the

Jyotishee to ensure that each person is addressed within THEIR paradigm. We

can't use excuses like, "their karma is simply mixed-up", or "their just not

vedic-compatible", or "attuned to vedic standards."

These sound like cop-outs for not being able to read someone's chart.

 

It is the Jyotishee's job to "attune himself" to the person he is reading for,

not to force the person to be alienated from a good reading due to some 'karma

mix-up', or 'non-vedic compatible karma'. These ideas seem absurd.

 

I do agree with you that some families charts are 'more-so' fragmented in

relation to each other. This reflects how many people out there aren't setting

clear intentions in relation to their families/kids/etc.

 

I apologize for the strong language, but I expect a Jyotishee to be a little

more open to the differences within the universe...not to call the diversity

"mixed-up"...especially since every chart that ever was, IS different.

 

Just some thoughts-

Peace-

Ashwin

 

 

 

Das Goravani <> wrote:

 

I have heard from time to time that a Jyotishi got it right- the exact

number of children somebody has, and their genders, in proper order, and so

on.

 

I don't know the rules, tricks, or whatever, to do that.

 

I have 10 brothers and sisters, all from same natural parents. My mother

was Irish Catholic and my Dad was willing to go along with it, for awhile.

 

Anyway...

 

Perhaps this thing, number of children, number of siblings, is easier to

read in some charts, and the same rules then might fail in other charts

because they are too fragmented karmicly.

 

That's a concept I've come to believe in- that some charts work better with

the rules, the Vedic concepts, than others, because the various souls have

either clear, vedic-compatible karma, and less clear more complex, more

"changed" from Vedic standards.

 

Like these days there is a very high amount of people born outside their

country of racial origin. So for example that's a mixup, so to speak,

karmicly. Then if one is homosexual, that's another, and so on.

 

But good luck anyway of course.

 

 

Das Goravani, President

 

2852 Willamette St, #353

Eugene, OR, 97405, USA-America

Voice: or in America

 

 

http://www.DancingMoonInc.com

 

 

 

 

 

Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya; Hare Krishna; Om Tat Sat

: gjlist-

 

 

 

Your use of is subject to

 

 

 

 

 

New Photos - easier uploading and sharing

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello

 

Your reply to my post contains some "correcting" of my conceptions which I

think are unnecessary. Our misunderstanding arises from subtle differences

in how we perceive the meaning of some key words, and also it arises from

the fact that I speak in a "loose" and "easy going" manner, and also, I

expect total friendliness and good will from everyone because that is what I

feel and am projecting to everyone. There I know, I am wrong. Everyone does

not feel as much good will as I do.

 

I stand by my post, but can see that it can be easily misunderstood, so I

apologize for that.

 

I do wish to clarify and re-emphasize one thing: Homosexuality is an anomoly

when it comes to Vedic astrology as it is taught in classical books. I have

NEVER seen it mentioned in Sanskrit texts in any way ever, what to speak of

being mentioned as "normal". There is no mention of how to read it, how to

predict it, and none of the houses, signs, planets or stars have been

assigned to it. So it's only through experience with charts that we find out

how to read it.

 

Understand however that I am not judgemental toward gays. Not at all.

 

My main point was this: VEDIC means something. It means being religious for

example. Look in the beginning of BPHS and it's end, other books as well,

and see how the qualifications for being a Jyotish are innumerated. They are

VEDIC in nature in that they mention having a Guru, believing in the Divine,

being submissive to Guru and Sastra, and so on.

 

I was taught at strict Vedic ashrams in India. I did standard things like

bathing before Sunrise, attending Mangal Arotik, performing Hari Nam Japa on

mala, offering things to the Thakur, offering dandavat to Gurudev, etc etc.

 

These things, like old fashioned religious village life in India, that is

what is Vedic.

 

To be into those things and to do those things requires a certain type of

chart. People with other types of charts will never do those things. Many

westerners will simply not be caught dead laying on the ground in front of a

Guru reciting Sanskrit mantras which speak of how liberating the Gurus meer

foot dust is.

 

But I have done those things. I ate the dirt at holy places. Once while

swimming across the Ganga in the Bay of Bengal (a scary thing to do and I've

done it many times) a Tulasi leaf floated up to me. It was large, and in

perfect fresh green condition, so I ate it, seeing it as Krishna's mercy

upon me for my devotions in Navadwip. That is Vedic. Few have the

opportunity or knowledge of such things in this lifetime except some strict

Indians. It's a small thing, but I'm trying to make a point.

 

If you are aligned like this with "Vedic", then I find, again I FIND,

personally, that your chart is easier to read with Vedic astrology. When it

says something is bad, the person will tend to agree. If it says something

is good, the person will tend to agree.

 

For example: If you look at the charts of persons who REALLY ENJOY in a

Western sense, they are usually charts which are "bad" in a true Vedic

sense. Take laziness- people like being lazy, but it's considered "bad" in

Vedic astrology because in spiritual reality it IS BAD.

 

Take wanton sex, drugs, greed, murder, etc etc., all these things that are

considered "bad" by Vedic Spiritual Philosophy and Scripture are found to be

ruled by malefic planets, houses, signs, combinations, etc.

 

So my point was simple: If someone that is, the karma of the being in

question, is very non-religious, non-spiritual, full of desire, full of bad

actions and choices, then their chart becomes harder to read because for

example- the placements of the "self", like lagna and moon, will be found to

be "seeing" the malefics as "friends", thus, the person always makes wrong

choices, and this is harder to read, compared to a chart where what IS

malefic IS SEEN IN THE CHART as malefic, is seen by the person as malefic,

and is easily read in the chart for what it is.

 

I hope this attempt at a clarification helps.

 

I stand by my original idea, which I've tried to further explain here.

 

Thanks, I don't mind further discussing this rather important point.

 

Richard MacKai

 

 

 

Das Goravani, President

 

2852 Willamette St, #353

Eugene, OR, 97405, USA-America

Voice: or in America

 

 

http://www.DancingMoonInc.com