RE: Rise of planets and True nodes

[Guest guest]

|| Jaya Jagannath ||

Dear Rao,

 

Everything well said... Just a few points to add. At all times, the

nodes are only mathematical points of conjunction of the Lunar orbit

around earth and the Ecliptic. The true nodes are true at all times, as

the points of intersection shall always exist. However, the difference

between True and the Mean node is that in the first case we take the

true motion of the nodes whereas in the latter case, we only take the

average ones.

 

Philosophically, nodes being the opposite of the luminaries (who are

always in direct motion), should always be in retrograde motion and that

is the reason why we take the mean nodes, which cannot be direct at

anytime, even if true nodes can!

 

Best Wishes

Sarajit

 

 

Rao Nemani [raon1008]

Monday, September 22, 2003 7:47 PM

vedic astrology

[vedic astrology] Re: Rise of planets and True nodes

 

Dear Manu,

 

The following is my understanding from Narasimha Ji's and

Sanjay Ji's teachings so far and others may have different

opinion, but I am following this:

 

The so-called "true" nodes are the intersection points of the

momentary apparent lunar orbit and the ecliptic (or, to be more

correct, the momentary apparent orbit of Sun).

 

Actually the expression "true nodes" is a misnomer. It is

rather "hypothetical nodes". The true nodes are true only

twice a month, when Moon crosses the ecliptic. At other times,

the positions given for them are just a hypothesis.

 

Mean nodes always move backwards (which is what Rahu and Ketu

are supposed to do, as per scriptures and classics). True nodes h

ave an osculating motion - they move forward for sometime and

backward for sometime (but backward overall).

 

Narasimha Ji mentioned once "Based on my researches with

divisional charts and Narayana dasa, I strongly recommend

the so-called "mean" nodes. Of course, others may differ.",

so I am following that.

 

Hope this is helpful.

 

Regards

Raghunadha Rao

 

vedic astrology, "Manu Batura"

<manubatura> wrote:

> Dear All,

>

> What is the correct approach as far as Vedic astrology is

concerned?

>

> 1. Should we take the apparent position of the planets or the real

> longitudes?

>

> 2. Should be take the true nodes or the mean nodes?

>

> Thanks & Regards,

> Manu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your use of is subject to