Guest guest Posted February 6, 2002 Report Share Posted February 6, 2002 Namaste Lakshmi, It appears I was wrong after all ( and, hence, not so intelligent). You have considered only graha drishtis and I did not point out this mistake. Later, when I saw Partha's mail, I realised my mistake. ONLY RASI DRISHTIS TO ARE BE CONSIDERED. Now, if you ignore graha drishtis: KE/MA comparison: Neither of them get any drishti. Therefore, compare the strength based on the no. of years contributed. Since Sc is odd-fotted, year count has to be forward. MA contributes 6 years & KE only 3. Hence MA wins. SA/RA comparison: Boh are conjoined with 2 grahas each & one with JU, the other with ME; neither of the two is either exalted or debilitated - hence, both are equal. However, RA occupies a movable sign, which is stronger than the dual sign occupied by SA. Hence RA wins. This matches JHL computations also. Apologies for my earlier mistake - and misguidance. With best wishes, Shailesh 1.5.1 For comparing the strengths of Rahu/Saturn and Ketu/Mars. 1. First see if one lord is in that sign. If so, other lord is example, if Saturn is in Aquarius, then invariably Rahu should be taken as its lord. 2. If one of the above houses is with a larger number of planets, then he is stronger. 3. "SWAAMI GURUJNA DRIGYOGAHA". If one of them is aspected by more out of Jupiter, Mercury and its Dispositor, then he is stronger. These carry equal weight. Example : Lets assume that we are considering Le & Aq(1/7). Lets also assume that Le is aspected by Ju & Aq by Me, and their lords do not aspect their respective signs. Then there is a tie. When looking for the aspect of lord/dispositor, you can settle for aspect from either lord, but you have to use the stronger lord in all other rules. 4. If one of them is exalted, then he is stronger (opposite for debilitation). 5. One occupying a sign of higher natural strength is stronger. Dual < Fixed < Movable. 6. One giving more years is stronger. 7. A sign whose lord is more advanced in longitude from the beginning of its sign is stronger. Note: Rahu and Ketu's advancement should be measured from the end of sign rather than beginning. Hence Rahu/Ketu's actual advancement will be (30-longitude). - lakshmi ramesh sjvc Tuesday, February 05, 2002 12:12 PM [sjvc] Narayana dasa-Saileshji Om Gurave Namah Namaste Sailesh, After reading your mail, I was inspired to run Narayana Dasa for my chart, but got stuck regarding the following: 1) To calculate Scorpio dasa, I was in a fix whether to take Mars or Ketu as Lord. Mars is in 6H and Ketu is in 3H, both are alone, both are not aspected by either Jupiter or Mercury. But Ketu is aspected by dispositor Saturn, so I considered Ketu as scorpio lord. Though Mars is AK, Sanjayji said that we should not consider this strength for Narayana Dasa, which is basically run from Lagna, so I’ve ignored this point. 2) Trying to calculate Aquarius dasa, I was again on sticky ground. Both Saturn & Rahu are with 2 planets each, which include their dispositors. Saturn is with Jupiter, while Rahu is with Mercury and is aspected by Jupiter. But I took Saturn as Aquarius lord because he’s in a dual sign and with a stronger Jupiter. Have I done the above correctly? I am not very confident and seek your guidance. Saileshji, you are a very intelligent man, but more than that, you are a VERY VERY nice person. I think that matters above every thing else. Best regards, Lakshmi P.S: I know that it sounds stupid to stay just across a street and seek clarifications via mail. Can I come and wish you on your birthday? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2002 Report Share Posted February 6, 2002 dear sailesh if i remmeber correctly the dual signs are stronger than the fixed signs and fixed greater than moveable. you have quoted in revverse. thus saturn will win and not rahu. regards partha sjvc, "Shailesh" <scchadha@h...> wrote: > Namaste Lakshmi, > > It appears I was wrong after all ( and, hence, not so intelligent). > > You have considered only graha drishtis and I did not point out this mistake. Later, when I saw Partha's mail, I realised my mistake. ONLY RASI DRISHTIS TO ARE BE CONSIDERED. > > Now, if you ignore graha drishtis: > > KE/MA comparison: > Neither of them get any drishti. > > Therefore, compare the strength based on the no. of years contributed. > > Since Sc is odd-fotted, year count has to be forward. MA contributes 6 years & KE only 3. > > Hence MA wins. > > SA/RA comparison: > Boh are conjoined with 2 grahas each & one with JU, the other with ME; neither of the two is either exalted or debilitated - hence, both are equal. > > However, RA occupies a movable sign, which is stronger than the dual sign occupied by SA. > > Hence RA wins. > > This matches JHL computations also. > > Apologies for my earlier mistake - and misguidance. > > With best wishes, > > Shailesh > > > -- ------------ > > > 1.5.1 For comparing the strengths of Rahu/Saturn and Ketu/Mars. > > > > 1. First see if one lord is in that sign. If so, other lord is example, if Saturn is in Aquarius, then invariably Rahu should be taken as its lord. > > > > 2. If one of the above houses is with a larger number of planets, then he is stronger. > > > > 3. "SWAAMI GURUJNA DRIGYOGAHA". If one of them is aspected by more out of Jupiter, Mercury and its Dispositor, then he is stronger. These carry equal weight. > > > > Example : > > Lets assume that we are considering Le & Aq(1/7). > > Lets also assume that Le is aspected by Ju & Aq by Me, and their lords do not aspect their respective signs. Then there is a tie. > > > > When looking for the aspect of lord/dispositor, you can settle for aspect from either lord, but you have to use the stronger lord in all other rules. > > > > 4. If one of them is exalted, then he is stronger (opposite for debilitation). > > > > 5. One occupying a sign of higher natural strength is stronger. Dual < Fixed < Movable. > > > > 6. One giving more years is stronger. > > > > 7. A sign whose lord is more advanced in longitude from the beginning of its sign is stronger. > > Note: Rahu and Ketu's advancement should be measured from the end of sign rather than beginning. > > Hence Rahu/Ketu's actual advancement will be (30- longitude). > > > -- ------------ > > > - > lakshmi ramesh > sjvc > Tuesday, February 05, 2002 12:12 PM > [sjvc] Narayana dasa-Saileshji > > > > Om Gurave Namah > > > > Namaste Sailesh, > > > > After reading your mail, I was inspired to run Narayana Dasa for my chart, but got stuck regarding the following: > > > > 1) To calculate Scorpio dasa, I was in a fix whether to take Mars or Ketu as Lord. Mars is in 6H and Ketu is in 3H, both are alone, both are not aspected by either Jupiter or Mercury. But Ketu is aspected by dispositor Saturn, so I considered Ketu as scorpio lord. Though Mars is AK, Sanjayji said that we should not consider this strength for Narayana Dasa, which is basically run from Lagna, so I've ignored this point. > > 2) Trying to calculate Aquarius dasa, I was again on sticky ground. Both Saturn & Rahu are with 2 planets each, which include their dispositors. Saturn is with Jupiter, while Rahu is with Mercury and is aspected by Jupiter. But I took Saturn as Aquarius lord because he's in a dual sign and with a stronger Jupiter. > > > > Have I done the above correctly? I am not very confident and seek your guidance. > > > > Saileshji, you are a very intelligent man, but more than that, you are a VERY VERY nice person. I think that matters above every thing else. > > > > Best regards, > > Lakshmi > > P.S: I know that it sounds stupid to stay just across a street and seek clarifications via mail. Can I come and wish you on your birthday? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2002 Report Share Posted February 7, 2002 Om Gurave Namah Namaste Sailesh, Prior to your mail I didn’t know that JHL has ND facility. Thanks to you, now I have explored this and many other features. I am yet to get used to Rasi drishti, I guess. Graha drishti was definitely a mistake. I also didn’t know this rule that the planet which gives longer period should be considered stronger. Thanks again, Regards, Lakshmi P.S: You are nice because you are yourself. Shailesh <scchadha (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote: Namaste Lakshmi, It appears I was wrong after all ( and, hence, not so intelligent). You have considered only graha drishtis and I did not point out this mistake. Later, when I saw Partha's mail, I realised my mistake. ONLY RASI DRISHTIS TO ARE BE CONSIDERED. Now, if you ignore graha drishtis: KE/MA comparison: Neither of them get any drishti. Therefore, compare the strength based on the no. of years contributed. Since Sc is odd-fotted, year count has to be forward. MA contributes 6 years & KE only 3. Hence MA wins. SA/RA comparison: Boh are conjoined with 2 grahas each & one with JU, the other with ME; neither of the two is either exalted or debilitated - hence, both are equal. However, RA occupies a movable sign, which is stronger than the dual sign occupied by SA. Hence RA wins. This matches JHL computations also. Apologies for my earlier mistake - and misguidance. With best wishes, Shailesh 1.5.1 For comparing the strengths of Rahu/Saturn and Ketu/Mars. 1. First see if one lord is in that sign. If so, other lord is example, if Saturn is in Aquarius, then invariably Rahu should be taken as its lord. 2. If one of the above houses is with a larger number of planets, then he is stronger. 3. "SWAAMI GURUJNA DRIGYOGAHA". If one of them is aspected by more out of Jupiter, Mercury and its Dispositor, then he is stronger. These carry equal weight. Example : Lets assume that we are considering Le & Aq(1/7). Lets also assume that Le is aspected by Ju & Aq by Me, and their lords do not aspect their respective signs. Then there is a tie. When looking for the aspect of lord/dispositor, you can settle for aspect from either lord, but you have to use the stronger lord in all other rules. 4. If one of them is exalted, then he is stronger (opposite for debilitation). 5. One occupying a sign of higher natural strength is stronger. Dual < Fixed < Movable. 6. One giving more years is stronger. 7. A sign whose lord is more advanced in longitude from the beginning of its sign is stronger. Note: Rahu and Ketu's advancement should be measured from the end of sign rather than beginning. Hence Rahu/Ketu's actual advancement will be (30-longitude). - lakshmi ramesh sjvc Tuesday, February 05, 2002 12:12 PM [sjvc] Narayana dasa-Saileshji Om Gurave Namah Namaste Sailesh, After reading your mail, I was inspired to run Narayana Dasa for my chart, but got stuck regarding the following: 1) To calculate Scorpio dasa, I was in a fix whether to take Mars or Ketu as Lord. Mars is in 6H and Ketu is in 3H, both are alone, both are not aspected by either Jupiter or Mercury. But Ketu is aspected by dispositor Saturn, so I considered Ketu as scorpio lord. Though Mars is AK, Sanjayji said that we should not consider this strength for Narayana Dasa, which is basically run from Lagna, so I’ve ignored this point. 2) Trying to calculate Aquarius dasa, I was again on sticky ground. Both Saturn & Rahu are with 2 planets each, which include their dispositors. Saturn is with Jupiter, while Rahu is with Mercury and is aspected by Jupiter. But I took Saturn as Aquarius lord because he’s in a dual sign and with a stronger Jupiter. Have I done the above correctly? I am not very confident and seek your guidance. Saileshji, you are a very intelligent man, but more than that, you are a VERY VERY nice person. I think that matters above every thing else. Best regards, Lakshmi P.S: I know that it sounds stupid to stay just across a street and seek clarifications via mail. Can I come and wish you on your birthday?Your use of is subject to the Send FREE Valentine eCards with Greetings! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2002 Report Share Posted February 7, 2002 Dear Lakhsmi, It was a case of another mail, another error - unfortunately. There is an obvious mistake in Narayan Iyer's compilation - I was uncomfortable about it but did not cross check. And since it matched JHL calculations, I felt reassured. Partha, and then Nandan have pointed out the obvious - the strength of rashis mentioned by Narayana is totally reverse. (You must have seen their mails). In fact, the natural & correct order is Dual > Fixed > Movable. Therefore, SA in Sg (dual) is stronger than RA in Le (fixed) - hence SA should be taken as Lord of Aq. Having accepted that, we land in a small problem. Since Aq is an even-footed Rasi, the year count for it is in reverse/ anti-clock direction and SA, occupying Sg, contributes 2 years. However, as per ND calculations of JHL, Aq dasa is for 6 years (indicating that RA has been considered as lord of Aq). I hope Gurus, especially Narsimha Rao garu, will help in clearing-up this confusion. With best wishes, Shailesh - lakshmi ramesh sjvc Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:26 PM Re: [sjvc] Narayana dasa-Saileshji Om Gurave Namah Namaste Sailesh, Prior to your mail I didn’t know that JHL has ND facility. Thanks to you, now I have explored this and many other features. I am yet to get used to Rasi drishti, I guess. Graha drishti was definitely a mistake. I also didn’t know this rule that the planet which gives longer period should be considered stronger. Thanks again, Regards, Lakshmi P.S: You are nice because you are yourself. Shailesh <scchadha (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote: Namaste Lakshmi, It appears I was wrong after all ( and, hence, not so intelligent). You have considered only graha drishtis and I did not point out this mistake. Later, when I saw Partha's mail, I realised my mistake. ONLY RASI DRISHTIS TO ARE BE CONSIDERED. Now, if you ignore graha drishtis: KE/MA comparison: Neither of them get any drishti. Therefore, compare the strength based on the no. of years contributed. Since Sc is odd-fotted, year count has to be forward. MA contributes 6 years & KE only 3. Hence MA wins. SA/RA comparison: Boh are conjoined with 2 grahas each & one with JU, the other with ME; neither of the two is either exalted or debilitated - hence, both are equal. However, RA occupies a movable sign, which is stronger than the dual sign occupied by SA. Hence RA wins. This matches JHL computations also. Apologies for my earlier mistake - and misguidance. With best wishes, Shailesh 1.5.1 For comparing the strengths of Rahu/Saturn and Ketu/Mars. 1. First see if one lord is in that sign. If so, other lord is example, if Saturn is in Aquarius, then invariably Rahu should be taken as its lord. 2. If one of the above houses is with a larger number of planets, then he is stronger. 3. "SWAAMI GURUJNA DRIGYOGAHA". If one of them is aspected by more out of Jupiter, Mercury and its Dispositor, then he is stronger. These carry equal weight. Example : Lets assume that we are considering Le & Aq(1/7). Lets also assume that Le is aspected by Ju & Aq by Me, and their lords do not aspect their respective signs. Then there is a tie. When looking for the aspect of lord/dispositor, you can settle for aspect from either lord, but you have to use the stronger lord in all other rules. 4. If one of them is exalted, then he is stronger (opposite for debilitation). 5. One occupying a sign of higher natural strength is stronger. Dual < Fixed < Movable. 6. One giving more years is stronger. 7. A sign whose lord is more advanced in longitude from the beginning of its sign is stronger. Note: Rahu and Ketu's advancement should be measured from the end of sign rather than beginning. Hence Rahu/Ketu's actual advancement will be (30-longitude). 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.