Answer to Mahalinga (Narasimha's post on Jayalalitha)

[Guest guest]

Dear Mahalinga Iyer,

 

You ask good questions, but you are becoming repititive. Raising

questions is nice, but trying to answer them is nicer. Why don't you

try to find some answers yourself?

 

Anyway, I will try to answer within the limits of my knowledge and

time:

 

(1) Though many people are born every minute ON AVERAGE, there

doesn't need to be A UNIFORM distribution of births across time. With

a particular special D-1-to-D-60 combination, only one person may be

born and thousands may be born with a more common D-1-to-D-60

combination. Just based on the AVERAGE birth rate, you cannot

conclude that all of Jayalalita's charts are shared by many people.

That is merely a hypothesis.

 

(2) Not only lagna in all D-charts, but GL and HL also matter. In the

examples you gave, some people may have different GL in D-10.

 

(3) Vimsottari dasa is a very important dasa. As I mentioned earlier,

there are 3 important influences on the results of a dasa: (a) natal

chart, (b) dasa pravesh (period commencement) chart, and, © transit

chart.

 

Let us take a person at the same place as Jayalalita, but 10 seconds

earlier/later. Let us find the difference in Vimsottari dasa

commencement time due to this. Use the formula mn/4 in my book. Here

m is 10/60=1/6 and n =7 (first dasa is Ketu dasa). So the error in

commencement time is (1/6)x7/4 days = 7 hours! For 2 people born 10

sec apart in Ketu dasa, dasa pravesh charts are 7 hours apart.

 

So the dasa pravesh chart will be totally different. They can have

considerably different results.

 

The question is: But, do we use dasa pravesh charts in our analysis?

Unfortunately most of us don't, but tradition teaches us to. In fact,

Sanjay told me about his grandfather who would meticulously notice a

lot of minor events in life and rectify the correct longitude of Moon

and the correct dates and times when dasas, antardasas,

pratyantardasas, sookshma dasas etc start. He is aware of ayanamsa

problems and planet calculation inaccuracies and so directly

rectifies Moon's longitude instead of birthtime! He looks at sookshma

and prana-antardasas and their commencement charts at the time of

simple day-to-day events and rectifies Moon's longitude directly.

 

Some people wrongly assume that traditional pundits rely on simple

methods. This is a misconception. SOME traditional pundits with good

grounding in theory are very meticulous and methodical and do a lot

of systematic and painstaking analysis. Sanjay's grandfather is an

example. It's sad that we, in the age of computers, haven't risen to

that level yet. We do a lot of things rather arbitrarily and depend

on luck a lot.

 

Anyway, to answer your point, all these factors make a difference. If

we don't consider them, it is our problem and not a problem of the

system. The Vedic system, atleast as taught to me by my tradition,

has enough degrees of freedom.

 

Now to answer some questions in part 1 of your mail:

 

(4) If I gave the birthtime as 14:36:30, it does not mean I know that

the time is accurate upto seconds. I may have a window of one minute

in my rectification and this may be the mid-point. I did not mention

the precision of my calculations. You just assumed it.

 

(5) As for ayanamsa inaccuracy, my rectified time is for my ayanamsa.

If you use a different ayanamsa, you may need a different birthtime

to get the same lagna. The bottomline is that lagna should be close

to my rectified lagna and stay in the same rasis in D-1, D-9, D-10

and D-60.

 

(6) Instead of hypothetical examples, if you really have someone who

has the same D-1 to D-60 as Jayalalita, please share the data. Though

that person may not be a chief minister, I will bet that there will

be some similarities in the results of Moola dasas. We can take it up

if you have real data instead of speculation.

 

This is all I've got time to write now. I suggest that you should try

to find some answers yourself, instead of making the same criticism

again and again.

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

 

> 02/24/1948 at 14:39:00 in Tirupati 13n39, 79e25

> 02/24/1948 at 14:39:17 in Kanchipuram 12n50, 79e43

> 02/24/1948 at 14:39:55 in Cuddapah 14n28, 78e49

> 02/24/1948 at 14:40:11 in Pondicherry 11n56, 79e53

> 02/24/1948 at 14:41:00 in Chittoor 13n12, 79e07

> 02/24/1948 at 14:45:04 in Thanjavur 10n48, 79e09

> 02/24/1948 at 14:47:28 in Bangalore 12n59, 77e35

> 02/24/1948 at 14:47:30 in Salem 11n39, 78e10

> 02/24/1948 at 14:52:25 in Mysore 12n18, 76e39

> 02/24/1948 at 14:57:45 in Calicut 11n15, 75e46

>

> In ALL the above cases, we have Lagna at 21.17 Gemini, Hora

> Lagna and Ghati Lagna in Libra.

>

> We also have the IDENTICAL lagna and planetary placements in

> D-60 as in Jayalalita's "original" chart (I do not know about

> Yakshamsa or Amritamsa, but if they are dependent on degrees

> of planets, they would be identical as well).

>

> Now, if we look at the time/place combinations I have chosen,

> we find that between 14:36:30 in Madras and 14:57:45 in Calicut,

> we have substantially the SAME chart rising over a significant

> part of South India. Again, there are *minor* differences, such

> as GL and HL in D-60, the "janma vighati graha" etc, but nobody

> can deny that the chart is substantially the same.

>

> Anybody born in any of these dozens of "time-place windows" would

> have the same chart!!

>

> All the above three paragraphs apply fully to all the people born

in

> the "time-place windows" mentioned earlier. Now, either nobody was

> born at all in South India with the same D-1 and D-60 (a remarkable

> fact, given India's population and birth rate) or the same

> placements of Venus and Jupiter did not do the same thing for the

> others!