Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 ||Hare Rama Krsna|| Dear Naliniji, What I am writing is little off the topic of discussion. Also, I am no expert on the topic. But, being a beginner student myself, I am able to understand why you are feeling confused. The topic of discussion was whether Rahu and Ketu have aspects. You felt that since Ketu is described as Mokshakaraka, it must be important. Also you wondered if it is considered as a planet at all. Later you have also added the word Chara Karaka. I think we should go step by step. What is important is - What is a Graha and what forms the basis of aspects. Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is related to aspects? I thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we not mixing up too many things? The reason I wrote the earlier mail (asking you to concentrate more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') was, that I feel sometimes the English words (which do not exactly fit) take our line of thought in a different direction. Later they cause more doubts. But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their nature, why Rahu - Ketu are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, then it is a little easier to grasp the concept. Also, one thing I have realised (the hard way) is that if I study basics first and then read the comments of learned members here, I am able to learn and understand better than if I try the other way round. I thought I'll share my experience with you. If there's anything you didn't like, then being elder to me, please forgive it as my immaturity. The intention was only to share with you my own trial and errors....... Regards, Divya auromirra19 <nalini2818 wrote: Dear Prashantji, Divyaji, Graha- also means to grasp, hold is it not, not only these two nodes? grab/hold but swallow!! As for emanating light, rahu and ketu are said to be incapable of any emanating rays-rasmi or light. Sani vad rahu, kuja vad ketu is well known.But though Rahu is given the status of a planet and ownership, ketu is denied it and also of ownership.The charakarakas are also limited to 7, and ketu is not included but rahu is given his place.Ketu is said to be agu- that means without light. How very conflicting and confusing (for me atleast) Regards Nalini , Prashant Kumar G B <gbp_kumar wrote: > > Divya, > > U r partly right, but missed the important point by Graha it means a light emenating celestial body, rahu & ketu too emnate the invisible light band, rahu & ketu also represent the extreme ends of the celestial orb of the Moon and whithin its belt only the 27 constellations and Grahas r refered to astrologically say Pole Star or Dhruva is not counted even though noticed easily by all civilisations. > > In results also rahu gives sani's and ketu mars's results; or the sign where they r posited. but Sanivad rahu is a norm well known, > VARAHAMIHRA IS QUOTED by some as not havign given any role to rahu, ketu in his Brihat Jataka. > > Well Varahamihra is a great complier not a composer he merely collected what each sage said and compiled it, nowhere u can find a line say I find this or I vouch for this. etc. > and as he largely quotes Yauvanacharya or greeks too, who have not heard of rahu, ketu. > earlier works by Parashara talks of it and BRIHAT PARASHARA HORA IS THE BENCH MARK of India/vedic astrology, all other works expanded on it as is required to suit every age, culture, political set ups at the time. > > Prashant > > Divya <touchbase_divya wrote: ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > Dear Naliniji, > > I'd just like to add a point here..... > > I think the word 'Graha' is loosely translated as 'planet' in English. Maybe there is no other word that comes close to it. > > Though we have 9 Grahas. But are there actually 9 planets? Moon is a satellite. Sun is a star. Rahu, Ketu have no physical existance. > > Regards, > Divya > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818 wrote: > Dear JL, > If ketu does not aspect, then why is he called mokshakaraka. being > karaka why does he not have drishti? it is said because rahu and > ketu are chaya grahas, those who do not have rasmi- the rays.Then > are these two not considered planets at all? Please explain. > Regards > Nalini > , Jyotish Learner > <vedicastro_mind@> wrote: > > > > how can ketu aspects its totally wrong he is headless he doesnt > have any aspect. > > > > > > regards, > > j.l > > > > > > shriji002 <shriji002@> wrote: > > respected astrologers > > > > please tell what are aspects of rahu,ketu.some say rahu > > aspects 5,9,7,12 houses. and ketu aspects houses that rahu aspects. > > ie. 3,6,11.houses from it. > > some say ketu aspects 5,7,9,12 houses from it. > > which view is correct. > > > > also what impact will solar eclipse have,and till when will > > the effect last. > > > > regards > > shri > > > Prashant > > > New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates. > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. Visit your group "" on the web. Jiyo cricket on India cricket Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 -[Om Namo Narayanaya] Dear Divya, When it comes to learning or knowledge, age is no criterion. I welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing up too many things. I thought it prudent to start my study of jyotish diligently, systematically on a particular muhurta. I shall certainly , as advised by you start only from the basics/classics. I did read a couple of articles/lectures of learned members in the fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The assimilation part was ok, should have slotted them in the respective places but inexperienced that I am, have bungled. And you know the net result, confusion. Thanks, God Bless Nalini -- In , Divya <touchbase_divya wrote: > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > Dear Naliniji, > > What I am writing is little off the topic of discussion. Also, I am no expert on the topic. But, being a beginner student myself, I am able to understand why you are feeling confused. > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu and Ketu have aspects. > You felt that since Ketu is described as Mokshakaraka, it must be important. Also you wondered if it is considered as a planet at all. Later you have also added the word Chara Karaka. > > I think we should go step by step. > > What is important is - What is a Graha and what forms the basis of aspects. > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is related to aspects? I thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we not mixing up too many things? > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail (asking you to concentrate more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') was, that I feel sometimes the English words (which do not exactly fit) take our line of thought in a different direction. Later they cause more doubts. > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their nature, why Rahu - Ketu are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, then it is a little easier to grasp the concept. > > Also, one thing I have realised (the hard way) is that if I study basics first and then read the comments of learned members here, I am able to learn and understand better than if I try the other way round. > > I thought I'll share my experience with you. If there's anything you didn't like, then being elder to me, please forgive it as my immaturity. The intention was only to share with you my own trial and errors....... > > Regards, > Divya > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818 wrote: > Dear Prashantji, Divyaji, > Graha- also means to grasp, hold is it not, not only these two > nodes? grab/hold but swallow!! As for emanating light, rahu and ketu > are said to be incapable of any emanating rays-rasmi or light. Sani > vad rahu, kuja vad ketu is well known.But though Rahu is given the > status of a planet and ownership, ketu is denied it and also of > ownership.The charakarakas are also limited to 7, and ketu is not > included but rahu is given his place.Ketu is said to be agu- that > means without light. How very conflicting and confusing (for me > atleast) > Regards > Nalini > , Prashant Kumar G B > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > Divya, > > > > U r partly right, but missed the important point by Graha it > means a light emenating celestial body, rahu & ketu too emnate the > invisible light band, rahu & ketu also represent the extreme ends > of the celestial orb of the Moon and whithin its belt only the 27 > constellations and Grahas r refered to astrologically say Pole Star > or Dhruva is not counted even though noticed easily by all > civilisations. > > > > In results also rahu gives sani's and ketu mars's results; or > the sign where they r posited. but Sanivad rahu is a norm well > known, > > VARAHAMIHRA IS QUOTED by some as not havign given any role to > rahu, ketu in his Brihat Jataka. > > > > Well Varahamihra is a great complier not a composer he merely > collected what each sage said and compiled it, nowhere u can find a > line say I find this or I vouch for this. etc. > > and as he largely quotes Yauvanacharya or greeks too, who have > not heard of rahu, ketu. > > earlier works by Parashara talks of it and BRIHAT PARASHARA HORA > IS THE BENCH MARK of India/vedic astrology, all other works > expanded on it as is required to suit every age, culture, political > set ups at the time. > > > > Prashant > > > > Divya <touchbase_divya@> wrote: ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > I'd just like to add a point here..... > > > > I think the word 'Graha' is loosely translated as 'planet' in > English. Maybe there is no other word that comes close to it. > > > > Though we have 9 Grahas. But are there actually 9 planets? > Moon is a satellite. Sun is a star. Rahu, Ketu have no physical > existance. > > > > Regards, > > Divya > > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > Dear JL, > > If ketu does not aspect, then why is he called mokshakaraka. > being > > karaka why does he not have drishti? it is said because rahu and > > ketu are chaya grahas, those who do not have rasmi- the > rays.Then > > are these two not considered planets at all? Please explain. > > Regards > > Nalini > > , Jyotish Learner > > <vedicastro_mind@> wrote: > > > > > > how can ketu aspects its totally wrong he is headless he > doesnt > > have any aspect. > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > j.l > > > > > > > > > shriji002 <shriji002@> wrote: > > > respected astrologers > > > > > > please tell what are aspects of rahu,ketu.some say rahu > > > aspects 5,9,7,12 houses. and ketu aspects houses that rahu > aspects. > > > ie. 3,6,11.houses from it. > > > some say ketu aspects 5,7,9,12 houses from it. > > > which view is correct. > > > > > > also what impact will solar eclipse have,and till when will > > > the effect last. > > > > > > regards > > > shri > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC > for low, low rates. > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > > Jiyo cricket on India cricket > Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein realities and shadows merge and create confusion for beginners like us. It is so interesting that while various approaches to Jyotish can glibly explain the same chart accurately in various forms, its still contending with major issues regards Rishi , "auromirra19" <nalini2818 wrote: > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > Dear Divya, > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age is no criterion. I > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing up too many things. I > thought it prudent to start my study of jyotish diligently, > systematically on a particular muhurta. I shall certainly , as > advised by you start only from the basics/classics. > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of learned members in the > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The assimilation part was ok, > should have slotted them in the respective places but inexperienced > that I am, have bungled. And you know the net result, confusion. > Thanks, > God Bless > Nalini > -- In , Divya <touchbase_divya@> > wrote: > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > What I am writing is little off the topic of discussion. Also, I > am no expert on the topic. But, being a beginner student myself, I > am able to understand why you are feeling confused. > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu and Ketu have aspects. > > You felt that since Ketu is described as Mokshakaraka, it must > be important. Also you wondered if it is considered as a planet at > all. Later you have also added the word Chara Karaka. > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha and what forms the basis > of aspects. > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is related to aspects? I > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we not mixing up too many > things? > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail (asking you to concentrate > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') was, that I feel > sometimes the English words (which do not exactly fit) take our line > of thought in a different direction. Later they cause more doubts. > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their nature, why Rahu - Ketu > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, then it is a little > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the hard way) is that if I > study basics first and then read the comments of learned members > here, I am able to learn and understand better than if I try the > other way round. > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with you. If there's anything > you didn't like, then being elder to me, please forgive it as my > immaturity. The intention was only to share with you my own trial > and errors....... > > > > Regards, > > Divya > > > > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > Dear Prashantji, Divyaji, > > Graha- also means to grasp, hold is it not, not only these two > > nodes? grab/hold but swallow!! As for emanating light, rahu and > ketu > > are said to be incapable of any emanating rays-rasmi or light. > Sani > > vad rahu, kuja vad ketu is well known.But though Rahu is given the > > status of a planet and ownership, ketu is denied it and also of > > ownership.The charakarakas are also limited to 7, and ketu is not > > included but rahu is given his place.Ketu is said to be agu- that > > means without light. How very conflicting and confusing (for me > > atleast) > > Regards > > Nalini > > , Prashant Kumar G B > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > Divya, > > > > > > U r partly right, but missed the important point by Graha it > > means a light emenating celestial body, rahu & ketu too emnate > the > > invisible light band, rahu & ketu also represent the extreme ends > > of the celestial orb of the Moon and whithin its belt only the 27 > > constellations and Grahas r refered to astrologically say Pole > Star > > or Dhruva is not counted even though noticed easily by all > > civilisations. > > > > > > In results also rahu gives sani's and ketu mars's results; or > > the sign where they r posited. but Sanivad rahu is a norm well > > known, > > > VARAHAMIHRA IS QUOTED by some as not havign given any role to > > rahu, ketu in his Brihat Jataka. > > > > > > Well Varahamihra is a great complier not a composer he merely > > collected what each sage said and compiled it, nowhere u can find > a > > line say I find this or I vouch for this. etc. > > > and as he largely quotes Yauvanacharya or greeks too, who have > > not heard of rahu, ketu. > > > earlier works by Parashara talks of it and BRIHAT PARASHARA > HORA > > IS THE BENCH MARK of India/vedic astrology, all other works > > expanded on it as is required to suit every age, culture, > political > > set ups at the time. > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > Divya <touchbase_divya@> wrote: ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > I'd just like to add a point here..... > > > > > > I think the word 'Graha' is loosely translated as 'planet' in > > English. Maybe there is no other word that comes close to it. > > > > > > Though we have 9 Grahas. But are there actually 9 planets? > > Moon is a satellite. Sun is a star. Rahu, Ketu have no physical > > existance. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Divya > > > > > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > Dear JL, > > > If ketu does not aspect, then why is he called mokshakaraka. > > being > > > karaka why does he not have drishti? it is said because rahu > and > > > ketu are chaya grahas, those who do not have rasmi- the > > rays.Then > > > are these two not considered planets at all? Please explain. > > > Regards > > > Nalini > > > , Jyotish Learner > > > <vedicastro_mind@> wrote: > > > > > > > > how can ketu aspects its totally wrong he is headless he > > doesnt > > > have any aspect. > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > j.l > > > > > > > > > > > > shriji002 <shriji002@> wrote: > > > > respected astrologers > > > > > > > > please tell what are aspects of rahu,ketu.some say rahu > > > > aspects 5,9,7,12 houses. and ketu aspects houses that rahu > > aspects. > > > > ie. 3,6,11.houses from it. > > > > some say ketu aspects 5,7,9,12 houses from it. > > > > which view is correct. > > > > > > > > also what impact will solar eclipse have,and till when will > > > > the effect last. > > > > > > > > regards > > > > shri > > > > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > > > > New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your > PC > > for low, low rates. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH > THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > > > > > > Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jiyo cricket on India cricket > > Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the > time. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Dear Rishi ji and interested others, As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list a few times and I hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of context: The only true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through prediction and only through consistently correct predictions. To which I add -- who needs further proof or discussion and only silence can prevail! Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us but something to strive for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. Rao. rohiniranjan , "rishi_2000in" <rishi_2000in wrote: > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein realities and shadows merge > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > It is so interesting that while various approaches to Jyotish can > glibly explain the same chart accurately in various forms, its still > contending with major issues > > regards > Rishi > > > , "auromirra19" > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > Dear Divya, > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age is no criterion. I > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing up too many things. I > > thought it prudent to start my study of jyotish diligently, > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I shall certainly , as > > advised by you start only from the basics/classics. > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of learned members in the > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The assimilation part was ok, > > should have slotted them in the respective places but > inexperienced > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the net result, confusion. > > Thanks, > > God Bless > > Nalini > > -- In , Divya <touchbase_divya@> > > wrote: > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the topic of discussion. Also, > I > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a beginner student myself, I > > am able to understand why you are feeling confused. > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu and Ketu have > aspects. > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as Mokshakaraka, it must > > be important. Also you wondered if it is considered as a planet at > > all. Later you have also added the word Chara Karaka. > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha and what forms the > basis > > of aspects. > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is related to aspects? I > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we not mixing up too many > > things? > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail (asking you to > concentrate > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') was, that I feel > > sometimes the English words (which do not exactly fit) take our > line > > of thought in a different direction. Later they cause more doubts. > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their nature, why Rahu - > Ketu > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, then it is a little > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the hard way) is that if I > > study basics first and then read the comments of learned members > > here, I am able to learn and understand better than if I try the > > other way round. > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with you. If there's > anything > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, please forgive it as my > > immaturity. The intention was only to share with you my own trial > > and errors....... > > > > > > Regards, > > > Divya > > > > > > > > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > Dear Prashantji, Divyaji, > > > Graha- also means to grasp, hold is it not, not only these two > > > nodes? grab/hold but swallow!! As for emanating light, rahu and > > ketu > > > are said to be incapable of any emanating rays-rasmi or light. > > Sani > > > vad rahu, kuja vad ketu is well known.But though Rahu is given > the > > > status of a planet and ownership, ketu is denied it and also of > > > ownership.The charakarakas are also limited to 7, and ketu is > not > > > included but rahu is given his place.Ketu is said to be agu- > that > > > means without light. How very conflicting and confusing (for me > > > atleast) > > > Regards > > > Nalini > > > , Prashant Kumar G B > > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Divya, > > > > > > > > U r partly right, but missed the important point by Graha it > > > means a light emenating celestial body, rahu & ketu too emnate > > the > > > invisible light band, rahu & ketu also represent the extreme > ends > > > of the celestial orb of the Moon and whithin its belt only the > 27 > > > constellations and Grahas r refered to astrologically say Pole > > Star > > > or Dhruva is not counted even though noticed easily by all > > > civilisations. > > > > > > > > In results also rahu gives sani's and ketu mars's results; > or > > > the sign where they r posited. but Sanivad rahu is a norm well > > > known, > > > > VARAHAMIHRA IS QUOTED by some as not havign given any role > to > > > rahu, ketu in his Brihat Jataka. > > > > > > > > Well Varahamihra is a great complier not a composer he > merely > > > collected what each sage said and compiled it, nowhere u can > find > > a > > > line say I find this or I vouch for this. etc. > > > > and as he largely quotes Yauvanacharya or greeks too, who > have > > > not heard of rahu, ketu. > > > > earlier works by Parashara talks of it and BRIHAT PARASHARA > > HORA > > > IS THE BENCH MARK of India/vedic astrology, all other works > > > expanded on it as is required to suit every age, culture, > > political > > > set ups at the time. > > > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > > > Divya <touchbase_divya@> wrote: ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > I'd just like to add a point here..... > > > > > > > > I think the word 'Graha' is loosely translated as 'planet' > in > > > English. Maybe there is no other word that comes close to it. > > > > > > > > Though we have 9 Grahas. But are there actually 9 planets? > > > Moon is a satellite. Sun is a star. Rahu, Ketu have no physical > > > existance. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Divya > > > > > > > > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > Dear JL, > > > > If ketu does not aspect, then why is he called mokshakaraka. > > > being > > > > karaka why does he not have drishti? it is said because rahu > > and > > > > ketu are chaya grahas, those who do not have rasmi- the > > > rays.Then > > > > are these two not considered planets at all? Please explain. > > > > Regards > > > > Nalini > > > > , Jyotish Learner > > > > <vedicastro_mind@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > how can ketu aspects its totally wrong he is headless he > > > doesnt > > > > have any aspect. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > j.l > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shriji002 <shriji002@> wrote: > > > > > respected astrologers > > > > > > > > > > please tell what are aspects of rahu,ketu.some say rahu > > > > > aspects 5,9,7,12 houses. and ketu aspects houses that rahu > > > aspects. > > > > > ie. 3,6,11.houses from it. > > > > > some say ketu aspects 5,7,9,12 houses from it. > > > > > which view is correct. > > > > > > > > > > also what impact will solar eclipse have,and till when will > > > > > the effect last. > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > shri > > > > > > > > > > > > Prashant > > > > > > > > > > > > New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your > > PC > > > for low, low rates. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND > RELISH > > THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Terms of > > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jiyo cricket on India cricket > > > Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either you predict through a set of principles or you predict through intutive methods. The prediction through a set of principles need an understanding of the principles and when a variety of views float, which is but natural then confusion gets compounded. regards rishi --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list a > few times and I > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > context: The only > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > prediction and only > through consistently correct predictions. To which I > add -- who needs > further proof or discussion and only silence can > prevail! > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us but > something to strive > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. Rao. > > rohiniranjan > > > , > "rishi_2000in" > <rishi_2000in wrote: > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein realities > and shadows merge > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > It is so interesting that while various approaches > to Jyotish can > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > various forms, its > still > > contending with major issues > > > > regards > > Rishi > > > > > > , > "auromirra19" > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > Dear Divya, > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age is > no criterion. I > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing up > too many things. I > > > thought it prudent to start my study of jyotish > diligently, > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I shall > certainly , as > > > advised by you start only from the > basics/classics. > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > learned members in > the > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > assimilation part was > ok, > > > should have slotted them in the respective > places but > > inexperienced > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the net > result, confusion. > > > Thanks, > > > God Bless > > > Nalini > > > -- In , Divya > <touchbase_divya@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the topic of > discussion. > Also, > > I > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a beginner > student myself, > I > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > confused. > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu and > Ketu have > > aspects. > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > Mokshakaraka, it > must > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > considered as a planet > at > > > all. Later you have also added the word Chara > Karaka. > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha and > what forms the > > basis > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > related to aspects? > I > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we not > mixing up too > many > > > things? > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail (asking > you to > > concentrate > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > was, that I feel > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > exactly fit) take our > > line > > > of thought in a different direction. Later they > cause more > doubts. > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > nature, why Rahu - > > Ketu > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, then > it is a little > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the hard > way) is that if I > > > study basics first and then read the comments of > learned members > > > here, I am able to learn and understand better > than if I try the > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with you. > If there's > > anything > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, please > forgive it as my > > > immaturity. The intention was only to share with > you my own trial > > > and errors....... > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Divya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > Dear Prashantji, Divyaji, > > > > Graha- also means to grasp, hold is it not, > not only these two > > > > nodes? grab/hold but swallow!! As for > emanating light, rahu and > > > ketu > > > > are said to be incapable of any emanating > rays-rasmi or light. > > > Sani > > > > vad rahu, kuja vad ketu is well known.But > though Rahu is given > > the > > > > status of a planet and ownership, ketu is > denied it and also of > > > > ownership.The charakarakas are also limited to > 7, and ketu is > > not > > > > included but rahu is given his place.Ketu is > said to be agu- > > that > > > > means without light. How very conflicting and > confusing (for me > > > > atleast) > > > > Regards > > > > Nalini > > > > , > Prashant Kumar G B > > > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Divya, > > > > > > > > > > U r partly right, but missed the important > point by Graha > it > > > > means a light emenating celestial body, rahu > & ketu too emnate > > > the > > > > invisible light band, rahu & ketu also > represent the extreme > > ends > > > > of the celestial orb of the Moon and whithin > its belt only the > > 27 > > > > constellations and Grahas r refered to > astrologically say Pole > === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic parrot or the pot- bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances may be more accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of bengal gram, a few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of green chillies as opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, please!)--- In , rishi shukla <rishi_2000in wrote: > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either you > predict through a set of principles or you predict > through intutive methods. The prediction through a set > of principles need an understanding of the principles > and when a variety of views float, which is but > natural then confusion gets compounded. > regards > > rishi > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list a > > few times and I > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > context: The only > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > prediction and only > > through consistently correct predictions. To which I > > add -- who needs > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > prevail! > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us but > > something to strive > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. Rao. > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > , > > "rishi_2000in" > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein realities > > and shadows merge > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various approaches > > to Jyotish can > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > various forms, its > > still > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > regards > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > , > > "auromirra19" > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age is > > no criterion. I > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing up > > too many things. I > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of jyotish > > diligently, > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I shall > > certainly , as > > > > advised by you start only from the > > basics/classics. > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > learned members in > > the > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > assimilation part was > > ok, > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > places but > > > inexperienced > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the net > > result, confusion. > > > > Thanks, > > > > God Bless > > > > Nalini > > > > -- In , Divya > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the topic of > > discussion. > > Also, > > > I > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a beginner > > student myself, > > I > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu and > > Ketu have > > > aspects. > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > Mokshakaraka, it > > must > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > considered as a planet > > at > > > > all. Later you have also added the word Chara > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha and > > what forms the > > > basis > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > related to aspects? > > I > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we not > > mixing up too > > many > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail (asking > > you to > > > concentrate > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > was, that I feel > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > exactly fit) take our > > > line > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later they > > cause more > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > nature, why Rahu - > > > Ketu > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, then > > it is a little > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the hard > > way) is that if I > > > > study basics first and then read the comments of > > learned members > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand better > > than if I try the > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with you. > > If there's > > > anything > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, please > > forgive it as my > > > > immaturity. The intention was only to share with > > you my own trial > > > > and errors....... > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Divya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > Dear Prashantji, Divyaji, > > > > > Graha- also means to grasp, hold is it not, > > not only these two > > > > > nodes? grab/hold but swallow!! As for > > emanating light, rahu and > > > > ketu > > > > > are said to be incapable of any emanating > > rays-rasmi or light. > > > > Sani > > > > > vad rahu, kuja vad ketu is well known.But > > though Rahu is given > > > the > > > > > status of a planet and ownership, ketu is > > denied it and also of > > > > > ownership.The charakarakas are also limited to > > 7, and ketu is > > > not > > > > > included but rahu is given his place.Ketu is > > said to be agu- > > > that > > > > > means without light. How very conflicting and > > confusing (for me > > > > > atleast) > > > > > Regards > > > > > Nalini > > > > > , > > Prashant Kumar G B > > > > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Divya, > > > > > > > > > > > > U r partly right, but missed the important > > point by Graha > > it > > > > > means a light emenating celestial body, rahu > > & ketu too emnate > > > > the > > > > > invisible light band, rahu & ketu also > > represent the extreme > > > ends > > > > > of the celestial orb of the Moon and whithin > > its belt only the > > > 27 > > > > > constellations and Grahas r refered to > > astrologically say Pole > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 The parrot is a good learner. Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, the dasha years ..the list can go on merely illustrative and not exhaustive. So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies till eons. regards rishi --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > parrot or the pot- > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > may be more > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > bengal gram, a > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > green chillies as > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > please!)--- In > , rishi shukla > <rishi_2000in > wrote: > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > you > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > set > > of principles need an understanding of the > principles > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > regards > > > > rishi > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > a > > > few times and I > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > context: The only > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > prediction and only > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > which I > > > add -- who needs > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > prevail! > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > but > > > something to strive > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > Rao. > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > , > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > realities > > > and shadows merge > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > approaches > > > to Jyotish can > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > various forms, its > > > still > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > regards > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > "auromirra19" > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > is > > > no criterion. I > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > up > > > too many things. I > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > jyotish > > > diligently, > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > shall > > > certainly , as > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > basics/classics. > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > learned members in > > > the > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > assimilation part was > > > ok, > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > places but > > > > inexperienced > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > net > > > result, confusion. > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > God Bless > > > > > Nalini > > > > > -- In , > Divya > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > topic of > > > discussion. > > > Also, > > > > I > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > beginner > > > student myself, > > > I > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > and > > > Ketu have > > > > aspects. > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > must > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > considered as a planet > > > at > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > Chara > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > and > > > what forms the > > > > basis > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > related to aspects? > > > I > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > not > > > mixing up too > > > many > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > (asking > > > you to > > > > concentrate > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > was, that I feel > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > line > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > they > > > cause more > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > Ketu > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > then > > > it is a little > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > hard > > > way) is that if I > > > > > study basics first and then read the > comments of > > > learned members > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > better > > > than if I try the > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > you. > > > If there's > > > > anything > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > please > > > forgive it as my > === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Dear Divya ji, That was a very nice mail from you. You are on the right path. Believe in yourself. Congrats. Thanks for providing a good and sincere message. The systematic approch towards the subject and the systematic thinking ability is the fundamental ability, the lack of which cause a thousands of confuctions!! At times we lack it and mix-up different subjects and becomes confuced and no conclusions result!! Understanding this possibility is the first step in avoiding this pitfall. You have done it already, and so is in the right path. Love, Sreenadh > > -- In , Divya <touchbase_divya@> > > wrote: > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the topic of discussion. Also, > I > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a beginner student myself, I > > am able to understand why you are feeling confused. > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu and Ketu have > aspects. > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as Mokshakaraka, it must > > be important. Also you wondered if it is considered as a planet at > > all. Later you have also added the word Chara Karaka. > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha and what forms the > basis > > of aspects. > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is related to aspects? I > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we not mixing up too many > > things? > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail (asking you to > concentrate > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') was, that I feel > > sometimes the English words (which do not exactly fit) take our > line > > of thought in a different direction. Later they cause more doubts. > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their nature, why Rahu - > Ketu > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, then it is a little > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the hard way) is that if I > > study basics first and then read the comments of learned members > > here, I am able to learn and understand better than if I try the > > other way round. > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with you. If there's > anything > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, please forgive it as my > > immaturity. The intention was only to share with you my own trial > > and errors....... > > > > > > Regards, > > > Divya > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Rishiji, Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in the same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up and I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why is this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" but no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this lifetime. Regards Nalini , rishi shukla <rishi_2000in wrote: > > The parrot is a good learner. > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > illustrative and not exhaustive. > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > till eons. > regards > > rishi > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > parrot or the pot- > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > may be more > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > bengal gram, a > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > green chillies as > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > please!)--- In > > , rishi shukla > > <rishi_2000in@> > > wrote: > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > you > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > set > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > principles > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > regards > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > a > > > > few times and I > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > context: The only > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > prediction and only > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > which I > > > > add -- who needs > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > but > > > > something to strive > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > Rao. > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > realities > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > approaches > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > various forms, its > > > > still > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > is > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > up > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > jyotish > > > > diligently, > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > shall > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > learned members in > > > > the > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > assimilation part was > > > > ok, > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > places but > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > net > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > -- In , > > Divya > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > topic of > > > > discussion. > > > > Also, > > > > > I > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > beginner > > > > student myself, > > > > I > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > and > > > > Ketu have > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > must > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > considered as a planet > > > > at > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > Chara > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > and > > > > what forms the > > > > > basis > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > related to aspects? > > > > I > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > not > > > > mixing up too > > > > many > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > (asking > > > > you to > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > line > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > they > > > > cause more > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > then > > > > it is a little > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > hard > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > comments of > > > > learned members > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > better > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > you. > > > > If there's > > > > > anything > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > please > > > > forgive it as my > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Nalini ji, Just make sure to duck and getting bystander injury when all the 4000+ higher-ups begin falling down as gravity does its thing ;-) , "auromirra19" <nalini2818 wrote: > > Rishiji, > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in the > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up and > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why is > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" but > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > lifetime. > Regards > Nalini > , rishi shukla > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > till eons. > > regards > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > parrot or the pot- > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > may be more > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > bengal gram, a > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > green chillies as > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > please!)--- In > > > , rishi shukla > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > you > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > set > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > principles > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > regards > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > a > > > > > few times and I > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > context: The only > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > which I > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > but > > > > > something to strive > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > realities > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > approaches > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > still > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > is > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > up > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > jyotish > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > shall > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > learned members in > > > > > the > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > places but > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > net > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > -- In , > > > Divya > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > topic of > > > > > discussion. > > > > > Also, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > beginner > > > > > student myself, > > > > > I > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > and > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > must > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > at > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > Chara > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > and > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > I > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > not > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > many > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > (asking > > > > > you to > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > line > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > they > > > > > cause more > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > then > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > hard > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > comments of > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > better > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > you. > > > > > If there's > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > please > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Now now, Nalihiji -- please do not be so disturbed by all this internet 'noise'! It is good that you and others keep voicing their views and opinions boldly even if some may not like it or respond. Look at all these threads over the last few years. These discussions often started innocently are the real deal and challenge individuals to defend their points and to restate with clarity. And considering all the dust and noise and some 'smokes and mirrors' from time to time -- not one drop of blood on Tanvir's page! I wish the wars of the world and all the crime chases were as bloodless and as fiery and full of words of fury! Of course then we would have 9 billion people in the world (just kidding -- I already sense cyber- bazookas being aimed at this thread!). You are, dear soul, one of the catalysts -- actually most of us are catalysts. None of us get consumed and keep reentering the reaction but with all this sohaga -- the gold that will come out of the pot will be pure and brilliant with all impurities burnt out by the time the ingots are ready! Keep writing, keep challenging, keep this forum alive and awake. And take care of yourself personally and take nothing from here, personally! Oh and do remember to duck because when the 4000+ start falling down you do not want to become a bystander injury statistic (stale joke -- Sorry!!) Kind regards, RR , "auromirra19" <nalini2818 wrote: > > > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why is > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" but > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > lifetime. > Regards > Nalini Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 RR ji, How to escape the inevitable? Got used to being hit by" moving objects". By ducking would be giving up hold on the ladder, my support and I would also " Jill came tumbling after". But thanks for the advice, I shall watch out. Regards Nalini , "crystal pages" <jyotish_vani wrote: > > Nalini ji, > > Just make sure to duck and getting bystander injury when all the > 4000+ higher-ups begin falling down as gravity does its thing ;-) > > , "auromirra19" > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > Rishiji, > > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in > the > > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up > and > > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why > is > > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" > but > > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > > lifetime. > > Regards > > Nalini > > , rishi shukla > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > > till eons. > > > regards > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > > parrot or the pot- > > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > > may be more > > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > > bengal gram, a > > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > > green chillies as > > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > > please!)--- In > > > > , rishi shukla > > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > > you > > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > > set > > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > > principles > > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > > regards > > > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > > a > > > > > > few times and I > > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > > context: The only > > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > > which I > > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > > but > > > > > > something to strive > > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > > realities > > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > > approaches > > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > > still > > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > > is > > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > > up > > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > > jyotish > > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > > shall > > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > > learned members in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > > places but > > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > > net > > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > > -- In , > > > > Divya > > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > > topic of > > > > > > discussion. > > > > > > Also, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > > beginner > > > > > > student myself, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > > and > > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > > Chara > > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > > and > > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > > not > > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > > (asking > > > > > > you to > > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > > line > > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > > they > > > > > > cause more > > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > > then > > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > > hard > > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > > comments of > > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > > better > > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > > you. > > > > > > If there's > > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > > please > > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 The new kind of astroladder (comes with a year's supply of broad- spectrum remedies, TWO if you order within the next 10 minutes!) has a rung which is shaped like a bow and allows the clinger to move in a bit more and thus be slightly more protected from falling umm... debris. , "auromirra19" <nalini2818 wrote: > > RR ji, > How to escape the inevitable? Got used to being hit by" moving > objects". By ducking would be giving up hold on the ladder, my > support and I would also " Jill came tumbling after". But thanks for > the advice, I shall watch out. > Regards > Nalini > > , "crystal pages" > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > Nalini ji, > > > > Just make sure to duck and getting bystander injury when all the > > 4000+ higher-ups begin falling down as gravity does its thing ;-) > > > > , "auromirra19" > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > Rishiji, > > > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in > > the > > > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up > > and > > > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > > > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > > > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. > Why > > is > > > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" > > but > > > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take > this > > > lifetime. > > > Regards > > > Nalini > > > , rishi shukla > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > > > till eons. > > > > regards > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > > > parrot or the pot- > > > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > > > may be more > > > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > > > bengal gram, a > > > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > > > green chillies as > > > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > > > please!)--- In > > > > > , rishi shukla > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > > > you > > > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > > > set > > > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > > > principles > > > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > > > regards > > > > > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > > > a > > > > > > > few times and I > > > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > > > context: The only > > > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > > > which I > > > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > > > but > > > > > > > something to strive > > > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > > > realities > > > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > > > approaches > > > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > > > still > > > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > > > is > > > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > > > up > > > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > > > jyotish > > > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > > > shall > > > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > > > learned members in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > > > places but > > > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > > > net > > > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > > > -- In , > > > > > Divya > > > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > > > topic of > > > > > > > discussion. > > > > > > > Also, > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > > > beginner > > > > > > > student myself, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > > > and > > > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > > > Chara > > > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > > > and > > > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > > > not > > > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > > > (asking > > > > > > > you to > > > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > > > line > > > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > > > they > > > > > > > cause more > > > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > > > then > > > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > > > hard > > > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > > > comments of > > > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > > > better > > > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > > > you. > > > > > > > If there's > > > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > > > please > > > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection > around > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Dear Friends, In my contacts with Shri K.N.Rao at his residence I always found him not very happy to volunteer for making any prediction .certainly through paraasara light he makes a chakra on his own computer and assigns an Id but never gave yes or no immediately to problems.we all know his theory and principles of jyotish were never found wanting and in some cases hea made revealing forecasts which normal,ordinary astrologer would not have made. But to us as his students and discipels he always advised to be systematic and also pragmatic.he insisted that accuracy of data is always to be checked and tested.somehow he always felt that in 85% of cases data accuracy was questionable that makes predictions go awary.ceratinly he was never comfortable with the the success rate of predictions. So if this could be the feeling we as novices and always with several if and buts always safe to depend on parrots from accuracy point of view than to count on individual abilities.it is not that principles of jyotish are wrong.our predictive techics need refinement.This will always be a question mark and we need to be dediacted to the cause even if we feel and convince that jyotish can hand out 60--65% of correct predictions.the safe bet ceratinly nature's gift in a parrot.this should not be controversial issue how ever good and bad our forecasts abilities appear to be krishnan auromirra19 <nalini2818 wrote: Rishiji, Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in the same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up and I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why is this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" but no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this lifetime. Regards Nalini , rishi shukla <rishi_2000in wrote: > > The parrot is a good learner. > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > illustrative and not exhaustive. > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > till eons. > regards > > rishi > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > parrot or the pot- > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > may be more > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > bengal gram, a > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > green chillies as > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > please!)--- In > > , rishi shukla > > <rishi_2000in@> > > wrote: > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > you > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > set > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > principles > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > regards > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > a > > > > few times and I > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > context: The only > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > prediction and only > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > which I > > > > add -- who needs > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > but > > > > something to strive > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > Rao. > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > realities > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > approaches > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > various forms, its > > > > still > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > is > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > up > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > jyotish > > > > diligently, > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > shall > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > learned members in > > > > the > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > assimilation part was > > > > ok, > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > places but > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > net > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > -- In , > > Divya > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > topic of > > > > discussion. > > > > Also, > > > > > I > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > beginner > > > > student myself, > > > > I > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > and > > > > Ketu have > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > must > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > considered as a planet > > > > at > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > Chara > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > and > > > > what forms the > > > > > basis > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > related to aspects? > > > > I > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > not > > > > mixing up too > > > > many > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > (asking > > > > you to > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > line > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > they > > > > cause more > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > then > > > > it is a little > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > hard > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > comments of > > > > learned members > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > better > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > you. > > > > If there's > > > > > anything > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > please > > > > forgive it as my > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. Visit your group "" on the web. Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Dear Krishnanji, I have never been fortunate to be Shri KN Rao ji's student but my ... is he a breath of fresh air ever that blew over the stale plains of complacent jyotish? Despite his fairly strong and to some irritating views, some almost consider them abrasive -- I have never had any problems in accepting his fire for his sincerity and passion is so obvious and visible. Lord knows I have given him hard times almost to the point of confornting him on Ben's list and questioning about his statistics and sources (82% he said publicly and not 85 but small difference) and yet there is no other modern jyotishi who after B.V. Raman has done what KN Rao has done to revive jyotish globally since the early 90s! If you read his postings, and I have followed his for some years, his personal reverence for Raman and what he has done is unmistakable, as is his love for truth, no matter what, at least as he sees it and no one should ever be blamed for that. It has always pained me to my core to hear/read Shri Rao talk rather negatively about contemporary jyotishis in India and elsewhere -- but though originally astounded and dumb-founded the more I see, the more I see what he has talked about when he talks about the 'jyotish' scenario! It is up to all of us, one and all, successful or not, high or low on the ladder, accomplished or not, to question, question and question and if someone low or high gets upset or insulted by that or attacks us -- well obviously we have pressed some buttons rightly and prevented those from getting complacent and rusted! As PVR says, May Jupiter's LIGHT shine upon us, one bulb at a time! RR , vattem krishnan <bursar_99 wrote: > > Dear Friends, > In my contacts with Shri K.N.Rao at his residence I always found him not very happy to volunteer for making any prediction .certainly through paraasara light he makes a chakra on his own computer and assigns an Id but never gave yes or no immediately to problems.we all know his theory and principles of jyotish were never found wanting and in some cases hea made revealing forecasts which normal,ordinary astrologer would not have made. > But to us as his students and discipels he always advised to be systematic and also pragmatic.he insisted that accuracy of data is always to be checked and tested.somehow he always felt that in 85% of cases data accuracy was questionable that makes predictions go awary.ceratinly he was never comfortable with the the success rate of predictions. > So if this could be the feeling we as novices and always with several if and buts always safe to depend on parrots from accuracy point of view than to count on individual abilities.it is not that principles of jyotish are wrong.our predictive techics need refinement.This will always be a question mark and we need to be dediacted to the cause even if we feel and convince that jyotish can hand out 60--65% > of correct predictions.the safe bet ceratinly nature's gift in a parrot.this should not be controversial issue how ever good and bad our forecasts abilities appear to be > krishnan > auromirra19 <nalini2818 wrote: > Rishiji, > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in the > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up and > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why is > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" but > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > lifetime. > Regards > Nalini > , rishi shukla > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > till eons. > > regards > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > parrot or the pot- > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > may be more > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > bengal gram, a > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > green chillies as > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > please!)--- In > > > , rishi shukla > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > you > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > set > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > principles > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > regards > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > a > > > > > few times and I > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > context: The only > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > which I > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > but > > > > > something to strive > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > realities > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > approaches > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > still > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > is > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > up > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > jyotish > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > shall > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > learned members in > > > > > the > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > places but > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > net > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > -- In , > > > Divya > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > topic of > > > > > discussion. > > > > > Also, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > beginner > > > > > student myself, > > > > > I > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > and > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > must > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > at > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > Chara > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > and > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > I > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > not > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > many > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > (asking > > > > > you to > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > line > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > they > > > > > cause more > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > then > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > hard > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > comments of > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > better > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > you. > > > > > If there's > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > please > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > > Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Sir, I am ICAS trained soldier as far jyotish aspects are concerned.my unflinching faith in late B.V.Raman's approach (was very good)makes to pursue jyotish from research and academic point of view. .i have little to say on the controversies of ayanamsa.In ICAS it is not certainly Raman's ayanamsa which was not given really given any crdence. .Some how recognition in 90s earned by shri K.N.Rao (when was in his peak days) and decided to settle down to Bharateeya vidya bahvan's Institute and start on his own,the justification made by him to differ with shri B.V.Raman)was never taken kindly even today. it is ofcourse,the stars that play a vital even in the life of learned men.Today however he is the one who is very quite and ceratinly the year 2002 was also disappointing from predictions point of view for many many astrologers in the circuit as what really happened from mudane perspective was never an easy task to corroborate with jyotish theory.any way these stories now form part of history. Between two different poles(ICAS vs K.N.rao's school of thoughts) iam able to put up and continue.My reverences to Shri K.N.rao as my guru are unmistakable.we meet on different fora and i get his blessings with whcih iam happy. The ICAS today works more silently and is fulfiling it's objectives with out media glare.where as my guru is now often made busy by various T.V and print media.Probably he airs his views very strongly however unconvincing might be.For me Shri.K.n.rao is man of strong convictions and his style is totally different and is not at all client oriented.we are happy with his teachings as he aims in all of us to understand jyotish in most prudent and convincing ways.gives lot of emphais on statistical methods.His earnest desire today is that this spirit and interest evinced should be furthered.From this perspective he is a moving spirit for us krishnan crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: Dear Krishnanji, I have never been fortunate to be Shri KN Rao ji's student but my ... is he a breath of fresh air ever that blew over the stale plains of complacent jyotish? Despite his fairly strong and to some irritating views, some almost consider them abrasive -- I have never had any problems in accepting his fire for his sincerity and passion is so obvious and visible. Lord knows I have given him hard times almost to the point of confornting him on Ben's list and questioning about his statistics and sources (82% he said publicly and not 85 but small difference) and yet there is no other modern jyotishi who after B.V. Raman has done what KN Rao has done to revive jyotish globally since the early 90s! If you read his postings, and I have followed his for some years, his personal reverence for Raman and what he has done is unmistakable, as is his love for truth, no matter what, at least as he sees it and no one should ever be blamed for that. It has always pained me to my core to hear/read Shri Rao talk rather negatively about contemporary jyotishis in India and elsewhere -- but though originally astounded and dumb-founded the more I see, the more I see what he has talked about when he talks about the 'jyotish' scenario! It is up to all of us, one and all, successful or not, high or low on the ladder, accomplished or not, to question, question and question and if someone low or high gets upset or insulted by that or attacks us -- well obviously we have pressed some buttons rightly and prevented those from getting complacent and rusted! As PVR says, May Jupiter's LIGHT shine upon us, one bulb at a time! RR , vattem krishnan <bursar_99 wrote: > > Dear Friends, > In my contacts with Shri K.N.Rao at his residence I always found him not very happy to volunteer for making any prediction .certainly through paraasara light he makes a chakra on his own computer and assigns an Id but never gave yes or no immediately to problems.we all know his theory and principles of jyotish were never found wanting and in some cases hea made revealing forecasts which normal,ordinary astrologer would not have made. > But to us as his students and discipels he always advised to be systematic and also pragmatic.he insisted that accuracy of data is always to be checked and tested.somehow he always felt that in 85% of cases data accuracy was questionable that makes predictions go awary.ceratinly he was never comfortable with the the success rate of predictions. > So if this could be the feeling we as novices and always with several if and buts always safe to depend on parrots from accuracy point of view than to count on individual abilities.it is not that principles of jyotish are wrong.our predictive techics need refinement.This will always be a question mark and we need to be dediacted to the cause even if we feel and convince that jyotish can hand out 60--65% > of correct predictions.the safe bet ceratinly nature's gift in a parrot.this should not be controversial issue how ever good and bad our forecasts abilities appear to be > krishnan > auromirra19 <nalini2818 wrote: > Rishiji, > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in the > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up and > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why is > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" but > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > lifetime. > Regards > Nalini > , rishi shukla > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > till eons. > > regards > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > parrot or the pot- > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > may be more > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > bengal gram, a > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > green chillies as > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > please!)--- In > > > , rishi shukla > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > you > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > set > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > principles > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > regards > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > a > > > > > few times and I > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > context: The only > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > which I > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > but > > > > > something to strive > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > realities > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > approaches > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > still > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > is > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > up > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > jyotish > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > shall > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > learned members in > > > > > the > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > places but > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > net > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > -- In , > > > Divya > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > topic of > > > > > discussion. > > > > > Also, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > beginner > > > > > student myself, > > > > > I > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > and > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > must > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > at > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > Chara > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > and > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > I > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > not > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > many > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > (asking > > > > > you to > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > line > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > they > > > > > cause more > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > then > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > hard > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > comments of > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > better > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > you. > > > > > If there's > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > please > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > > Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. Visit your group "" on the web. New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Naliniji, I am at the bottom most rung in the ladder and prefer to be there, for its easier to look at the stars and the skies and watch for the rainbow regards rishi , "auromirra19" <nalini2818 wrote: > > Rishiji, > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in the > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up and > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why is > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" but > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > lifetime. > Regards > Nalini > , rishi shukla > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > till eons. > > regards > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > parrot or the pot- > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > may be more > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > bengal gram, a > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > green chillies as > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > please!)--- In > > > , rishi shukla > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > you > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > set > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > principles > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > regards > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > a > > > > > few times and I > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > context: The only > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > which I > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > but > > > > > something to strive > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > realities > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > approaches > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > still > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > is > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > up > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > jyotish > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > shall > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > learned members in > > > > > the > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > places but > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > net > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > -- In , > > > Divya > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > topic of > > > > > discussion. > > > > > Also, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > beginner > > > > > student myself, > > > > > I > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > and > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > must > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > at > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > Chara > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > and > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > I > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > not > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > many > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > (asking > > > > > you to > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > line > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > they > > > > > cause more > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > then > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > hard > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > comments of > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > better > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > you. > > > > > If there's > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > please > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Dear Krishnan ji, I thought ICAS trained jyotishis but you say soldiers! :-) Pardon my levity!! I myself am indebted to Prof. Raman's scholarly written books and articles which was pretty much what was written in lucid and logical english. There were books in hindi and other authors in english too but let us not go there. More importantly, I am indebted to his ayanamsha which together with K.P. opened my mind to the real possibility of using vimshottari dasha and I am indebted to Sri Nirmal Chandra Lahiri for his value without which I would not have seriously opened my eyes to dasa durations other than the conveniently prevailing norm imposed by recent Masters and Lords. I have already written about illustrious Sri KN Rao and I am fast approaching the line-limit that irritates some minds. It was nice of you to share your thoughts about your gurus. They are/were all great men and great souls. My sense is, though, that none of them would be happy if we turn jyotish into some holy shrine where questioning is not permitted and curiosity is squashed. I would consider that akin to infanticide! RR , vattem krishnan <bursar_99 wrote: > > Sir, > I am ICAS trained soldier as far jyotish aspects are concerned.my unflinching faith in late B.V.Raman's approach (was very good)makes to pursue jyotish from research and academic point of view. > .i have little to say on the controversies of ayanamsa.In ICAS it is not certainly Raman's ayanamsa which was not given really given any crdence. > .Some how recognition in 90s earned by shri K.N.Rao (when was in his peak days) and decided to settle down to Bharateeya vidya bahvan's Institute and start on his own,the justification made by him to differ with shri B.V.Raman)was never taken kindly even today. > it is ofcourse,the stars that play a vital even in the life of learned men.Today however he is the one who is very quite and ceratinly the year 2002 was also disappointing from predictions point of view for many many astrologers in the circuit as what really happened from mudane perspective was never an easy task to corroborate with jyotish theory.any way these stories now form part of history. > Between two different poles(ICAS vs K.N.rao's school of thoughts) iam able to put up and continue.My reverences to Shri K.N.rao as my guru are unmistakable.we meet on different fora and i get his blessings with whcih iam happy. > The ICAS today works more silently and is fulfiling it's objectives with out media glare.where as my guru is now often made busy by various T.V and print media.Probably he airs his views very strongly however unconvincing might be.For me Shri.K.n.rao is man of strong convictions and his style is totally different and is not at all client oriented.we are happy with his teachings as he aims in all of us to understand jyotish in most prudent and convincing ways.gives lot of emphais on statistical methods.His earnest desire today is that this spirit and interest evinced should be furthered.From this perspective he is a moving spirit for us > krishnan > > crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > Dear Krishnanji, > > I have never been fortunate to be Shri KN Rao ji's student but my ... > is he a breath of fresh air ever that blew over the stale plains of > complacent jyotish? Despite his fairly strong and to some irritating > views, some almost consider them abrasive -- I have never had any > problems in accepting his fire for his sincerity and passion is so > obvious and visible. Lord knows I have given him hard times almost to > the point of confornting him on Ben's list and questioning about his > statistics and sources (82% he said publicly and not 85 but small > difference) and yet there is no other modern jyotishi who after B.V. > Raman has done what KN Rao has done to revive jyotish globally since > the early 90s! If you read his postings, and I have followed his for > some years, his personal reverence for Raman and what he has done is > unmistakable, as is his love for truth, no matter what, at least as > he sees it and no one should ever be blamed for that. > > It has always pained me to my core to hear/read Shri Rao talk rather > negatively about contemporary jyotishis in India and elsewhere -- but > though originally astounded and dumb-founded the more I see, the more > I see what he has talked about when he talks about the 'jyotish' > scenario! > > It is up to all of us, one and all, successful or not, high or low on > the ladder, accomplished or not, to question, question and question > and if someone low or high gets upset or insulted by that or attacks > us -- well obviously we have pressed some buttons rightly and > prevented those from getting complacent and rusted! > > As PVR says, May Jupiter's LIGHT shine upon us, one bulb at a time! > > RR > > , vattem krishnan > <bursar_99@> wrote: > > > > Dear Friends, > > In my contacts with Shri K.N.Rao at his residence I always found > him not very happy to volunteer for making any prediction .certainly > through paraasara light he makes a chakra on his own computer and > assigns an Id but never gave yes or no immediately to problems.we > all know his theory and principles of jyotish were never found > wanting and in some cases hea made revealing forecasts which > normal,ordinary astrologer would not have made. > > But to us as his students and discipels he always advised to be > systematic and also pragmatic.he insisted that accuracy of data is > always to be checked and tested.somehow he always felt that in 85% of > cases data accuracy was questionable that makes predictions go > awary.ceratinly he was never comfortable with the the success rate of > predictions. > > So if this could be the feeling we as novices and always with > several if and buts always safe to depend on parrots from accuracy > point of view than to count on individual abilities.it is not that > principles of jyotish are wrong.our predictive techics need > refinement.This will always be a question mark and we need to be > dediacted to the cause even if we feel and convince that jyotish can > hand out 60--65% > > of correct predictions.the safe bet ceratinly nature's gift in a > parrot.this should not be controversial issue how ever good and bad > our forecasts abilities appear to be > > krishnan > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > Rishiji, > > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in > the > > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up > and > > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why > is > > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" > but > > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > > lifetime. > > Regards > > Nalini > > , rishi shukla > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > > till eons. > > > regards > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > > parrot or the pot- > > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > > may be more > > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > > bengal gram, a > > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > > green chillies as > > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > > please!)--- In > > > > , rishi shukla > > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > > you > > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > > set > > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > > principles > > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > > regards > > > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > > a > > > > > > few times and I > > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > > context: The only > > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > > which I > > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > > but > > > > > > something to strive > > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > > realities > > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > > approaches > > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > > still > > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > > is > > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > > up > > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > > jyotish > > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > > shall > > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > > learned members in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > > places but > > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > > net > > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > > -- In , > > > > Divya > > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > > topic of > > > > > > discussion. > > > > > > Also, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > > beginner > > > > > > student myself, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > > and > > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > > Chara > > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > > and > > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > > not > > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > > (asking > > > > > > you to > > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > > line > > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > > they > > > > > > cause more > > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > > then > > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > > hard > > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > > comments of > > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > > better > > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > > you. > > > > > > If there's > > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > > please > > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH > THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > > > > > > Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and > 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > > New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Dear Sir, Progressively Jyotish is catching to the imagination of educated people.people evince interest not only just 'coz of personal interest but also find many vague issues bothering them. un like some other lighter branches of futuristic explorartions,jyotish particularly vedic jyostish needs some regimentation to learn more through phladeepika,sarvardha chintamani and Brihat parasarhora. As we read some of these books and basics are clear,you will get many other aids to help in understanding jyotish. ceratinly the ongoing works in Astrology(particularly sideral) and even in fixed zodiac etc are no doubt interesting but their value addition to resolve problems and find consistency is a mute point.when questions are asked and apprehensions are made known,we have to take rescue of the fundamentals.unflinching faith is rudimenatary to vedic jyotish and various pariharas have significance. To speak of an instance one of my colleague worried much for not having progeny even after 13/14 years of married life,has atlast been blessed recently.Though frustated due to various interrogations,it was really difficult to have answered.At 40s to fulfil wish of having a child is difficult to explain.I know the parents at coimbatore in their old age must be greatly delighted.This has taken place with faith and ofcourse awareness of jyotish.the lady,my friend had done all kind of poojas.the blessings were delayed but not denied. The soldier approach of ICAS was helpful as to grind the principles.once the element of confidence is instilled,we are able to decipher and speak palnetary language.i think curiosity is momentary to know of the issues involved.when however serious bother many people and find no logic,we have to pound through basics and resolve. Ecclestical approach,is always helpful and KP is more specific of the stellar roles in resolving many issues and helps in application.Clarity is fundamental to explore futuristic studies and these approaches that supplement are of great value additions krishnan crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: Dear Krishnan ji, I thought ICAS trained jyotishis but you say soldiers! :-) Pardon my levity!! I myself am indebted to Prof. Raman's scholarly written books and articles which was pretty much what was written in lucid and logical english. There were books in hindi and other authors in english too but let us not go there. More importantly, I am indebted to his ayanamsha which together with K.P. opened my mind to the real possibility of using vimshottari dasha and I am indebted to Sri Nirmal Chandra Lahiri for his value without which I would not have seriously opened my eyes to dasa durations other than the conveniently prevailing norm imposed by recent Masters and Lords. I have already written about illustrious Sri KN Rao and I am fast approaching the line-limit that irritates some minds. It was nice of you to share your thoughts about your gurus. They are/were all great men and great souls. My sense is, though, that none of them would be happy if we turn jyotish into some holy shrine where questioning is not permitted and curiosity is squashed. I would consider that akin to infanticide! RR , vattem krishnan <bursar_99 wrote: > > Sir, > I am ICAS trained soldier as far jyotish aspects are concerned.my unflinching faith in late B.V.Raman's approach (was very good)makes to pursue jyotish from research and academic point of view. > .i have little to say on the controversies of ayanamsa.In ICAS it is not certainly Raman's ayanamsa which was not given really given any crdence. > .Some how recognition in 90s earned by shri K.N.Rao (when was in his peak days) and decided to settle down to Bharateeya vidya bahvan's Institute and start on his own,the justification made by him to differ with shri B.V.Raman)was never taken kindly even today. > it is ofcourse,the stars that play a vital even in the life of learned men.Today however he is the one who is very quite and ceratinly the year 2002 was also disappointing from predictions point of view for many many astrologers in the circuit as what really happened from mudane perspective was never an easy task to corroborate with jyotish theory.any way these stories now form part of history. > Between two different poles(ICAS vs K.N.rao's school of thoughts) iam able to put up and continue.My reverences to Shri K.N.rao as my guru are unmistakable.we meet on different fora and i get his blessings with whcih iam happy. > The ICAS today works more silently and is fulfiling it's objectives with out media glare.where as my guru is now often made busy by various T.V and print media.Probably he airs his views very strongly however unconvincing might be.For me Shri.K.n.rao is man of strong convictions and his style is totally different and is not at all client oriented.we are happy with his teachings as he aims in all of us to understand jyotish in most prudent and convincing ways.gives lot of emphais on statistical methods.His earnest desire today is that this spirit and interest evinced should be furthered.From this perspective he is a moving spirit for us > krishnan > > crystal pages <jyotish_vani wrote: > Dear Krishnanji, > > I have never been fortunate to be Shri KN Rao ji's student but my ... > is he a breath of fresh air ever that blew over the stale plains of > complacent jyotish? Despite his fairly strong and to some irritating > views, some almost consider them abrasive -- I have never had any > problems in accepting his fire for his sincerity and passion is so > obvious and visible. Lord knows I have given him hard times almost to > the point of confornting him on Ben's list and questioning about his > statistics and sources (82% he said publicly and not 85 but small > difference) and yet there is no other modern jyotishi who after B.V. > Raman has done what KN Rao has done to revive jyotish globally since > the early 90s! If you read his postings, and I have followed his for > some years, his personal reverence for Raman and what he has done is > unmistakable, as is his love for truth, no matter what, at least as > he sees it and no one should ever be blamed for that. > > It has always pained me to my core to hear/read Shri Rao talk rather > negatively about contemporary jyotishis in India and elsewhere -- but > though originally astounded and dumb-founded the more I see, the more > I see what he has talked about when he talks about the 'jyotish' > scenario! > > It is up to all of us, one and all, successful or not, high or low on > the ladder, accomplished or not, to question, question and question > and if someone low or high gets upset or insulted by that or attacks > us -- well obviously we have pressed some buttons rightly and > prevented those from getting complacent and rusted! > > As PVR says, May Jupiter's LIGHT shine upon us, one bulb at a time! > > RR > > , vattem krishnan > <bursar_99@> wrote: > > > > Dear Friends, > > In my contacts with Shri K.N.Rao at his residence I always found > him not very happy to volunteer for making any prediction .certainly > through paraasara light he makes a chakra on his own computer and > assigns an Id but never gave yes or no immediately to problems.we > all know his theory and principles of jyotish were never found > wanting and in some cases hea made revealing forecasts which > normal,ordinary astrologer would not have made. > > But to us as his students and discipels he always advised to be > systematic and also pragmatic.he insisted that accuracy of data is > always to be checked and tested.somehow he always felt that in 85% of > cases data accuracy was questionable that makes predictions go > awary.ceratinly he was never comfortable with the the success rate of > predictions. > > So if this could be the feeling we as novices and always with > several if and buts always safe to depend on parrots from accuracy > point of view than to count on individual abilities.it is not that > principles of jyotish are wrong.our predictive techics need > refinement.This will always be a question mark and we need to be > dediacted to the cause even if we feel and convince that jyotish can > hand out 60--65% > > of correct predictions.the safe bet ceratinly nature's gift in a > parrot.this should not be controversial issue how ever good and bad > our forecasts abilities appear to be > > krishnan > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote: > > Rishiji, > > Sad isnt it, but true. though I would refute that we are both in > the > > same rung of the ladder. I am far down and all others are way up > and > > I have vertigo! and confusion to confound it. > > It all started innocently, I read a few files/posts/articles of > > learned members in the fora. Now I am back to where I started. Why > is > > this? Where have I gone wrong? I hate to be "all sound and fury" > but > > no susbtance. But I dont give up, shall prod on, let it take this > > lifetime. > > Regards > > Nalini > > , rishi shukla > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > The parrot is a good learner. > > > Us beginners in Jyotish not so good as parrots so we > > > get confused with ayanamshas, the nodes, the vargas, > > > the dasha years ..the list can go on merely > > > illustrative and not exhaustive. > > > So there we go again, counting the stars in the skies > > > till eons. > > > regards > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > I hate it when it comes to duel between the psychic > > > > parrot or the pot- > > > > bellied astropundit! The parrot in some instances > > > > may be more > > > > accurate, demands fewer resources, a few fistfuls of > > > > bengal gram, a > > > > few pecks at the gulabi amrud and a few handfuls of > > > > green chillies as > > > > opposed to the pundit (let us not go there, > > > > please!)--- In > > > > , rishi shukla > > > > <rishi_2000in@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > True, Sir, but that exactly is the point, either > > > > you > > > > > predict through a set of principles or you predict > > > > > through intutive methods. The prediction through a > > > > set > > > > > of principles need an understanding of the > > > > principles > > > > > and when a variety of views float, which is but > > > > > natural then confusion gets compounded. > > > > > regards > > > > > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > --- crystal pages <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rishi ji and interested others, > > > > > > > > > > > > As Shri K.N. Rao ji has expressed on Ben's list > > > > a > > > > > > few times and I > > > > > > hope I am not quoting him incorrectly or out of > > > > > > context: The only > > > > > > true test for jyotish and jyotishi is through > > > > > > prediction and only > > > > > > through consistently correct predictions. To > > > > which I > > > > > > add -- who needs > > > > > > further proof or discussion and only silence can > > > > > > prevail! > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes -- difficult to impossible for most of us > > > > but > > > > > > something to strive > > > > > > for by those who respect and admire Mr. K.N. > > > > Rao. > > > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > "rishi_2000in" > > > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome, naliniji, to the club wherein > > > > realities > > > > > > and shadows merge > > > > > > > and create confusion for beginners like us. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is so interesting that while various > > > > approaches > > > > > > to Jyotish can > > > > > > > glibly explain the same chart accurately in > > > > > > various forms, its > > > > > > still > > > > > > > contending with major issues > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > > > Rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > "auromirra19" > > > > > > > <nalini2818@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -[Om Namo Narayanaya] > > > > > > > > Dear Divya, > > > > > > > > When it comes to learning or knowledge, age > > > > is > > > > > > no criterion. I > > > > > > > > welcome your advice. Yes I have been mixing > > > > up > > > > > > too many things. I > > > > > > > > thought it prudent to start my study of > > > > jyotish > > > > > > diligently, > > > > > > > > systematically on a particular muhurta. I > > > > shall > > > > > > certainly , as > > > > > > > > advised by you start only from the > > > > > > basics/classics. > > > > > > > > I did read a couple of articles/lectures of > > > > > > learned members in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > fora, both of Jaimini and Parashara. The > > > > > > assimilation part was > > > > > > ok, > > > > > > > > should have slotted them in the respective > > > > > > places but > > > > > > > inexperienced > > > > > > > > that I am, have bungled. And you know the > > > > net > > > > > > result, confusion. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > God Bless > > > > > > > > Nalini > > > > > > > > -- In , > > > > Divya > > > > > > <touchbase_divya@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||Hare Rama Krsna|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Naliniji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I am writing is little off the > > > > topic of > > > > > > discussion. > > > > > > Also, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > am no expert on the topic. But, being a > > > > beginner > > > > > > student myself, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > am able to understand why you are feeling > > > > > > confused. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The topic of discussion was whether Rahu > > > > and > > > > > > Ketu have > > > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > > You felt that since Ketu is described as > > > > > > Mokshakaraka, it > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > be important. Also you wondered if it is > > > > > > considered as a planet > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > all. Later you have also added the word > > > > Chara > > > > > > Karaka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go step by step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is important is - What is a Graha > > > > and > > > > > > what forms the > > > > > > > basis > > > > > > > > of aspects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did you feel that being a Karaka, is > > > > > > related to aspects? > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > thought Karaka was a separate topic. Are we > > > > not > > > > > > mixing up too > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > things? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason I wrote the earlier mail > > > > (asking > > > > > > you to > > > > > > > concentrate > > > > > > > > more on the word Graha rather than 'planet') > > > > > > was, that I feel > > > > > > > > sometimes the English words (which do not > > > > > > exactly fit) take our > > > > > > > line > > > > > > > > of thought in a different direction. Later > > > > they > > > > > > cause more > > > > > > doubts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if we concentrate on 'Graha', their > > > > > > nature, why Rahu - > > > > > > > Ketu > > > > > > > > are called Chaya Graha, also their nature, > > > > then > > > > > > it is a little > > > > > > > > easier to grasp the concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, one thing I have realised (the > > > > hard > > > > > > way) is that if I > > > > > > > > study basics first and then read the > > > > comments of > > > > > > learned members > > > > > > > > here, I am able to learn and understand > > > > better > > > > > > than if I try the > > > > > > > > other way round. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought I'll share my experience with > > > > you. > > > > > > If there's > > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > > you didn't like, then being elder to me, > > > > please > > > > > > forgive it as my > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH > THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > > > > > > Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and > 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. > > > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. > > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web. > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > > > New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big. > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY AND RELISH THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS. Vedic astrology Astrology chart Astrology software Visit your group "" on the web. New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates. 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.