Answer to Mahalinga (Narasimha's post on Jayalalitha)

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Thank you for the correction. I took the data I found in some book

and rectified it based on lagna and GL in D-10. If the birthplace is

slightly different, then the birthtime will have to change

accordingly to fit my rectification window.

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

 

> My two cents to this thread!

>

> Jayalalitha was born in Mysore,Karnataka and not in

> Tamil Nadu.She had her earlier schooling in Mysore

> itself.Her parentage is controversial except for the

> fact that her mother is Sandhya who was also a film

> actress!

>

> Regards,

> Gurukautilya

[Guest guest]

Dear members,

Often, we are facing questions on how can astrology work sort of questions.

While this is excellent for increasing our

understanding, we must realise a few things.

If two persons have exactly same horoscopes (in all devisions, and all

special lagnas etc.), then how come astrology is useful.

This is the question coming.

In our daily life we have weighing machines. Observe your wight on it

some 10 times. Do we observe the same reading all

10 times? Perhaps not. That is why, we are advised to take multiple

measurements and average them to get a more reliable

measure. Now, does this make weighing machines useless?? NO.

When we are reading a chart, there are 3 things that are actually effecting

the readings:

1. The charts (horoscope)

2. The time and place of reading

3. Who is reading (Here Jagannaath plays a role of giving spurana to

the astrologer).

If you go through Brihat Samhita (or Prasna Marga or any other book

perhaps), you will see the needed qualities for an

astrologer. He/she should be of good behaviour, god fearing etc. Why

is all this, if astrology is a set of conditions and rules.

It is not completely like any other science. HIS (Gods) WILL will guide

the astrologer to see the points HE want him to see.

Let us dis-agree from HIS WILL point for the time being:-

May be 7000 people are having same chart and astrologers across globegive

SAME reading to all those 7000.

But what is the global population? Say 7000 000. (70 lack people).

So, we have 7000000/7000 groups. i.e. 1000 groups. So, an astrologer

distinguishes 7000 000 people into 1000 groups.

Consider a non astrologer. Can he do a better job? If not, astrology

with all its limitations is still useful.

But, if astrologer could distinguish all 7000 000 people into 7000 000

individuals it would have been even better.

Now, just one more point. Out of 7000 people, when they approach an

astrologer, they would have some events

elapsed in thier life already. Does not this give a better idea to

astrologer?

While, I am not intending any ill to Mahalinga prabhu, and I myself

keep asking me about the same questions, I intend to

alert all not to ASSUME (till we have a better answere and proof )

THAT AN ASTROLOGER CAN TELL ANY THING AND EVERY THING AFTER LOOKING AT

A CHART WITH OUT FAIL (here, I am not talking about individual faults).

Best regards,

Vijay.

mahalinga_iyer wrote:

Namaste Narasimha,

Thank you for the reply - especially since you appear to be

pressed for time.

> 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?

You have a point. I realised I was probably becoming repetitive

after I sent this post...

I don't regret it, though - your point about a special D-1 and

D-60 being possibly unique, while a 'common' D-1 and D-60 being

shared among several people is an excellent one. So is the one

about Dasa pravesh charts.

I have other explanations for this, but I need to compose them

before presenting them to the group. Asking questions is rather

easier

My belief is that ANYTHING that can stand critical scrutiny

comes out stronger. If it does not survive, even then the critical

scrutiny played it's role, in eliminating that which did not

deserve belief in the first place.

To my mind, critical scrutiny is only reinforcing the necessity

of being *thorough* in understanding Jyotish. To that extent, I

am happy with the questions I am asking.

I hope I have smoothed a few ruffled feathers by explaining myself

thus.

I remain,

Mahalinga Iyer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

|| Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri

Krishnaarpanamastu ||

 

Terms of Service.