Is D-1 a superset of other D-charts? (reply to Satyaketu)

June 22, 2001

Namaste Dr. Chowdhary,

Your post makes some very interesting points. However, my point

about life patterns being different for men and women, *even* if

they are born at the same time (or within seconds of each other)

has been illustrated in a different post.

>is well known. When I talk of Nadiamshas, I am talking of standard

>Nadi texts like Dhruva nadi, Nava nadi etc. I am talking of

authentic

>texts and their METHODOLOGY of using the 300 ardhamshas

You are right, the use of Nadiamshas is likely to bring a far greater

level of precision to the readings. However, I ask you this:

Take the Mumbai example again, but consider a span of time:

For 21 June 2001, 03:41:10, the D-1 lagna is at Taurus 0 deg 00 min.

For 21 June 2001, 03:44:53, the D-1 lagna is at Taurus 1 deg 10 min.

A Nadiamsha is 0.2 degrees, so have five Nadiamshas in this interval.

Let us leave ardhanadiamshas for now, and consider only Nadiamshas.

1. We are saying that only five possible patterns of life are

possible

in

this minute span, which is debatable. That debate will take us

nowhere, but I would like to point out that more than five births

per minute are possible in a city like Mumbai.

2. If we have a unique individual like Rajiv Gandhi (for example),

and if we assign one Nadiamsa to him (based on his birth time

and known Nadiamsa effects), then we have to assume that he

does not share that Nadiamsa with anybody. Because if he did,

then that other person with whom he shared the Nadiamsa did

not become the PM etc etc, so the Nadiamsa effects did not

manifest for that other person! Note that I am not saying that

*only* the Nadiamsa should not be shared, but that we have to

essentially assume that nobody else was born within a minute

of Rajiv Gandhi in that same place. Can we reasonably make

that assumption??

3. More importantly, we are essentially saying that the Nadiamsa

effects are essentially over-riding. They have to be, since life

patterns that are not explainable using D-1 through D-24 *are*

explainable using D-150. If we agree with this, we *have to ask*,

whither "traditional astrology" ?? Meaning, what is the utility

of considering D-1, D-9 etc and not considering D-150, when the

effects of these "lesser divisional charts" can be overridden by

D-150.

>5. Taking independently just the D24 and expecting Jyotish or

>or the sages to have definite rules is not fair. I would still say

it

is

>reductionistic because two people with DIFFERENT NATAL charts

>could also have similar D-24 charts. The divisional charts are only

>SECONDARY to the natal chart. So no rules can be framed about

>the career or education based on JUST the divisional charts.

I should have made myself clear - I meant a person with D-1 through

D-24 in common, not just the D-24 (which is why I am using the

Mumbai example with a specific date and time range).

Do we have consensus that the divisional charts are SECONDARY

to the natal chart?? Perhaps Narasimha can comment - I was

under the impression that he says the natal chart (ie D-1) only

applies to the physical body.

>etc. Many new professions are coming up each day. Here let me make a

>distinction between PRINCIPLES and INTERPRETATIONS. Principles of

>Jyotish like Nine grahas and 12 rashis etc WILL NEVER change. That

I agree with you on the other points you made in your post. Your post

regarding the "ruling planet" theory should be interesting.

I remain,

Mahalinga Iyer

June 25, 2001

AUM NAMAH SIVAYA

Dear Mahalinga!

There are particular time which can give male birth and there are some which

give female. The time when male birth is shown, a female can't take birth

and vice-versa. I will give support to this arguement, but give me some

time. I have recently got transferred to new place and I don't have the

astrological texts with me....

Warm Regards

Sarajit Poddar

-

<mahalinga_iyer

Friday, June 22, 2001 10:55 PM

[vedic astrology] Is D-1 a superset of other D-charts? (reply to

Satyaketu)

>

> Namaste Dr. Chowdhary,

>

> Your post makes some very interesting points. However, my point

> about life patterns being different for men and women, *even* if

> they are born at the same time (or within seconds of each other)

> has been illustrated in a different post.

>

> >is well known. When I talk of Nadiamshas, I am talking of standard

> >Nadi texts like Dhruva nadi, Nava nadi etc. I am talking of

> authentic

> >texts and their METHODOLOGY of using the 300 ardhamshas

>

> You are right, the use of Nadiamshas is likely to bring a far greater

> level of precision to the readings. However, I ask you this:

>

> Take the Mumbai example again, but consider a span of time:

>

> For 21 June 2001, 03:41:10, the D-1 lagna is at Taurus 0 deg 00 min.

> For 21 June 2001, 03:44:53, the D-1 lagna is at Taurus 1 deg 10 min.

>

> A Nadiamsha is 0.2 degrees, so have five Nadiamshas in this interval.

>

> Let us leave ardhanadiamshas for now, and consider only Nadiamshas.

>

> 1. We are saying that only five possible patterns of life are

> possible

> in

> this minute span, which is debatable. That debate will take us

> nowhere, but I would like to point out that more than five births

> per minute are possible in a city like Mumbai.

>

> 2. If we have a unique individual like Rajiv Gandhi (for example),

> and if we assign one Nadiamsa to him (based on his birth time

> and known Nadiamsa effects), then we have to assume that he

> does not share that Nadiamsa with anybody. Because if he did,

> then that other person with whom he shared the Nadiamsa did

> not become the PM etc etc, so the Nadiamsa effects did not

> manifest for that other person! Note that I am not saying that

> *only* the Nadiamsa should not be shared, but that we have to

> essentially assume that nobody else was born within a minute

> of Rajiv Gandhi in that same place. Can we reasonably make

> that assumption??

>

> 3. More importantly, we are essentially saying that the Nadiamsa

> effects are essentially over-riding. They have to be, since life

> patterns that are not explainable using D-1 through D-24 *are*

> explainable using D-150. If we agree with this, we *have to ask*,

> whither "traditional astrology" ?? Meaning, what is the utility

> of considering D-1, D-9 etc and not considering D-150, when the

> effects of these "lesser divisional charts" can be overridden by

> D-150.

>

> >5. Taking independently just the D24 and expecting Jyotish or

> >or the sages to have definite rules is not fair. I would still say

> it

> is

> >reductionistic because two people with DIFFERENT NATAL charts

> >could also have similar D-24 charts. The divisional charts are only

> >SECONDARY to the natal chart. So no rules can be framed about

> >the career or education based on JUST the divisional charts.

>

> I should have made myself clear - I meant a person with D-1 through

> D-24 in common, not just the D-24 (which is why I am using the

> Mumbai example with a specific date and time range).

>

> Do we have consensus that the divisional charts are SECONDARY

> to the natal chart?? Perhaps Narasimha can comment - I was

> under the impression that he says the natal chart (ie D-1) only

> applies to the physical body.

>

> >etc. Many new professions are coming up each day. Here let me make a

> >distinction between PRINCIPLES and INTERPRETATIONS. Principles of

> >Jyotish like Nine grahas and 12 rashis etc WILL NEVER change. That

>

> I agree with you on the other points you made in your post. Your post

> regarding the "ruling planet" theory should be interesting.

>

> I remain,

>

> Mahalinga Iyer

>

> ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

>

> Your use of is subject to

>

June 25, 2001

Dear Anil!

Can you share your valuable research with the group. I will glad to get that information from you.

Thanks a lot

Sarajit

-

Anil

vedic astrology

Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:01 AM

Re: [vedic astrology] Is D-1 a superset of other D-charts? (reply to Satyaketu)

AUM NAMAH SIVAYA

Namaste Sarajit,

You wrote

"There are particular time which can give male birth and there are some whichgive female...."

I had also come across this information in some astrological texts a while ago.

Thereafter I had gone about collecting data from hospitals. Based on many

hundred birth times that I was able to get it was not possible to substantiate

the above.

Regards

Anil

-

Sarajit Poddar

vedic astrology

Monday, 25 June, 2001 12:08 AM

Re: [vedic astrology] Is D-1 a superset of other D-charts? (reply to Satyaketu)

AUM NAMAH SIVAYADear Mahalinga!There are particular time which can give male

birth and there are some whichgive female. The time when male birth is shown, a

female can't take birthand vice-versa. I will give support to this arguement,

but give me sometime. I have recently got transferred to new place and I don't

have theastrological texts with me....Warm RegardsSarajit Poddar----- Original

Message -----<mahalinga_iyer >To:

<vedic astrology>Friday, June 22, 2001 10:55 PMSubject:

[vedic astrology] Is D-1 a superset of other D-charts? (reply toSatyaketu)>>

Namaste Dr. Chowdhary,>> Your post makes some very interesting points. However,

my point> about life patterns being different for men and women, *even* if> they

are born at the same time (or within seconds of each other)> has been

illustrated in a different post.>> >is well known. When I talk of Nadiamshas, I

am talking of standard> >Nadi texts like Dhruva nadi, Nava nadi etc. I am

talking of> authentic> >texts and their METHODOLOGY of using the 300

ardhamshas>> You are right, the use of Nadiamshas is likely to bring a far

greater> level of precision to the readings. However, I ask you this:>> Take

the Mumbai example again, but consider a span of time:>> For 21 June 2001,

03:41:10, the D-1 lagna is at Taurus 0 deg 00 min.> For 21 June 2001, 03:44:53,

the D-1 lagna is at Taurus 1 deg 10 min.>> A Nadiamsha is 0.2 degrees, so have

five Nadiamshas in this interval.>> Let us leave ardhanadiamshas for now, and

consider only Nadiamshas.>> 1. We are saying that only five possible patterns

of life are> possible> in> this minute span, which is debatable. That

debate will take us> nowhere, but I would like to point out that more than

five births> per minute are possible in a city like Mumbai.>> 2. If we have

a unique individual like Rajiv Gandhi (for example),> and if we assign one

Nadiamsa to him (based on his birth time> and known Nadiamsa effects), then

we have to assume that he> does not share that Nadiamsa with anybody.

Because if he did,> then that other person with whom he shared the Nadiamsa

did> not become the PM etc etc, so the Nadiamsa effects did not>

manifest for that other person! Note that I am not saying that> *only* the

Nadiamsa should not be shared, but that we have to> essentially assume that

nobody else was born within a minute> of Rajiv Gandhi in that same place.

Can we reasonably make> that assumption??>> 3. More importantly, we are

essentially saying that the Nadiamsa> effects are essentially over-riding.

They have to be, since life> patterns that are not explainable using D-1

through D-24 *are*> explainable using D-150. If we agree with this, we

*have to ask*,> whither "traditional astrology" ?? Meaning, what is the

utility> of considering D-1, D-9 etc and not considering D-150, when the>

effects of these "lesser divisional charts" can be overridden by>

D-150.>>> >5. Taking independently just the D24 and expecting Jyotish or> >or

the sages to have definite rules is not fair. I would still say> it> is>

>reductionistic because two people with DIFFERENT NATAL charts> >could also

have similar D-24 charts. The divisional charts are only> >SECONDARY to the

natal chart. So no rules can be framed about> >the career or education based on

JUST the divisional charts.>> I should have made myself clear - I meant a person

with D-1 through> D-24 in common, not just the D-24 (which is why I am using

the> Mumbai example with a specific date and time range).>> Do we have

consensus that the divisional charts are SECONDARY> to the natal chart??

Perhaps Narasimha can comment - I was> under the impression that he says the

natal chart (ie D-1) only> applies to the physical body.>> >etc. Many new

professions are coming up each day. Here let me make a> >distinction between

PRINCIPLES and INTERPRETATIONS. Principles of> >Jyotish like Nine grahas and 12

rashis etc WILL NEVER change. That>> I agree with you on the other points you

made in your post. Your post> regarding the "ruling planet" theory should be

interesting.>> I remain,>> Mahalinga Iyer>>> Archives:

vedic astrology>> Group info:

vedic astrology/info.html>> To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology->> ....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......>> || Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri Krishnaarpanamastu

||>> Your use of is subject to

>>Archives:

vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

Archives:

vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

June 25, 2001

JAYA JAGANNATHA!

Dear Anil,

Namaste.

It is indeed mentioned in the Upadesa Sutras by Jaimini, that the ruling planet

of the birth Vighati will determine the sex of the child. But taking into

consideration, that the vighati is a time interval of only 24 seconds, it is

highly doubtful that the collected burth time info was accurate in all cases.

Plus, there is the big question of what to take as the actual Janma Vighati.

According to Sanjay and Srila Prabhupada, the time of birth is when the body of

the child is fully separated from the body of the mother, i.e. the umbilical

chord is cut. Let me quote here from Srila Prabhupada's purport to Srimad

Bhagavatam verse 2.10.28.

TRANSLATION

Thereafter, when He desired to move from one body to another, the navel and the

air of departure and death were combinedly created. The navel is the shelter

for both, namely death and the separating force.

PURPORT

The präëa-väyu continues the life, and the apäna-väyu stops the living force.

Both the vibrations are generated from the abdominal hole, the navel. This

navel is the joint from one body to the other. Lord Brahmä was born of the

abdominal hole of Garbhodakaçäyé Vińëu as a separate body, and the same

principle is followed even in the birth of any ordinary body. The body of the

child develops from the body of the mother, and when the child is separated

from the body of the mother, it is separated by cutting the navel joint. And

that is the way the Supreme Lord manifested Himself as separated many. The

living entities are therefore separated parts, and thus they have no

independence.

But if we would take an idela case of accurate data, I'm sute they would confirm

Maharishi Jamini's principles.

Yours,

Gauranga Das Vedic Astrologer <gauranga (AT) brihaspati (DOT) net> Phone:

+36-309-140-839 Jyotish Remedies: WWW.BRIHASPATI.NET

-

Anil

vedic astrology

Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:31 AM