Parashari-Jaimini ! (to Vijay Kumar)

[Guest guest]

Namaste Vijay,

 

> Dear readers,> > A view-point only.> > I felt that some scholars have been

hurt when I used the word "Jaimini System"

 

There is nothing here to be "hurt".

> Parashara has devoted a large number of chapters where Karakatwas, aspects,

> D-charts, results of planets and bhavas etc etc have been mentioned and by

> the time one gets acquinted to them, he exposes the sign aspects, karakamsha,

> upapada, arudhas etc etc.

 

Two points:

 

(1) Order does not matter. The thing covered later is not necessarily the less

important thing. For example, Vimsottari dasa was covered after bhava arudhas,

graha arudhas, rasi drishti, chara karakas etc were all covered!

 

(2) Even assuming that order is important, sign aspects were mentioned by

Parasara immediately after defining divisional charts and Vimsopaka bala. In

fact, sign-based aspects of signs and planets were mentioned even before the

house-based planetary aspects were mentioned. So sign aspects are very much the

most important basics of Parasara's teachings.

> Most of the scholars use planetary aspects, fixed karakas, use D-chats and

> follow Vimshottari dasha etc.. but do not simultaneously recognise sign aspects,

> chara karakas, chara dasha etc. Those of them may be called following

> Parasharic way of delineations.

 

Following Parasara does not imply you have to ignore all those things, which you

seem to mean by "not simultaneously recognising". Using all those concepts

(chara karakas, sign aspects, chara dasa, bhava/graha arudhas etc) along with

D-charts, Vimsottari dasa etc is valid and as per Parasara's teachings. That is

the true "Parasaric way" of delineations.

 

I have nothing against giving Jaimini his due. But I have everything against

this segregation and not recognizing certain concepts when using certain other

concepts! That is wrong. It is simply a corruption of the last few centuries.

> Maharshi Jaimini picked up the other set of parameters and developed on it

which may be called "The Jaimini system of astrology" even though the origin of

Jaimini principles could belong to Maharshi Parashara. Jaimini wrote his work in

the form of sutras, perhaps it was his way of writing (please do not question

it) !> > This is the way I view both the works. > > I think that an

un-necessary fuss is not required to discuss whether Jaimini

> astrology belongs to Jaimini or Parashara. There are many important things to

> remark rather than tangling on this issue.

 

I disagree, this "fuss" is quite necessary. Requiring one to "not simultaneously

recognise" certain concepts when doing Vimsottari dasa, for example, means you

are reducing the power of Vimsottari. Protesting against it is not fuss.

 

For example, my wife left her mother country for the first time in her life,

within a week from the beginning of my Mercury dasa (as per Vimsottari dasa,

which belongs to "Parasharic system" according to you). Of course, I may be

able to explain this in many round-about ways. But, the most simple and

straight-forward explanation is that Mercury is the 9th and 12thj lord in 7th,

from the arudha pada of the 7th lord in my navamsa (i.e. A7L in D-9)! If I am

expected to "not simultaneously recognise" graha arudhas when using Vimsottari

dasa ("Parasaric system"), I am at a loss! [To my students: Use this example as

a hint for the exercise I gave yesterday!]

 

I protest your characterization of this important point as "fuss".

 

The houses, arudha padas of houses, house lords and arudha padas of house lords

all have their own unique meanings. One cannot be used to replace another. Each

has a different meaning. Then what is the point in saying only some of them can

be used with Vimsottari dasa? That is illogical.

> I hope, my view-point is clear on this point.

 

I hope my view-point too is clear. The issue is segregation vs integration. And,

we don't have to do the integration ourselves. Maharshi Parasara did it for us

thousands of years back. In deciding what consistutes "Parasari system", let us

follow Parasara himself rather than somebody else!!

> In case, if my views (so far given) as reply to various posts are not

admissible to this elite group, I would not mind withdrawing myself, thus

avoiding hurt to anybody. Your feedback is solicited.> > Regards,> > Vijay

Kumar

 

You may not kindly withdraw yourself. Arguments are the job of the scholar. That

is why Virgo (natural 6th) is the moolatrikona (workplace) of Mercury (scholar).

Please consider the worth in my viewpoint.

 

In any case, there is no hurt. If we were standing face-to-face and talking

(rather than typing and reading emails), you would be able to see that I am

smiling here and not at all hurt or angry. Emails are a strange medium. All

emotions are withdrawn from the transmission and re-created in the minds of the

readers. It is so different from a face-to-face meeting.

 

You are most welcome to continue writing, either based on the teachings of

Parasara or the based on the teachings of Jaimini or based on an integrated

approach. As long as you do not make claims such as "this is not part of

Parasari system", "this is found only in Jaimini system", "you cannot use that

technique with Parasari system" etc, I will just keep quiet.

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,Narasimha

List founder & administrator