Rahu-to Pradeepji

[Guest guest]

Dear Anil kumar ji

Kindly call me pradeep.Thanks for your reply.

I don't think Monkey crocodile story has got a relevance here.

As per my understanding ,aspects of planets are not because of their

nature rather position/role.Hence Jupiter aspects 5th and 9th by

virtue of the role it has to play and thus posited angularly so,to

execute the role.Hence jupiters drishti would had been different if

it was sitting between venus & mercury.The role determines the

position and each position has got its on drishti range.Thus if Rahu

shifts to a new position, its aspects(if any?) will also be different.

My knowledge is less and hence cannot explain/answer more on this

topic.

 

Thanks again for your detailed explanations.

Regds

Pradeep

 

 

 

vedic astrology, "aokedia" <anilkedia@i...>

wrote:

>

>

> Dear Pradeepji

>

> RAM KRISHN HARE

>

> Please see my views below in your mail.

>

> vijayadas_pradeep Wrote:

> Dear Anil Kumar Ji & respected members It was really great to read

all

> your informative mails.Sahams,Tajik &TP, colours &remedies

etc.Thanks

> a lot.

>

> Anil:Thanks for your appreciation.

>

> Regarding the aspect of Rahu i have some doubts.Kindly throw more

> light. It was interesting to read about position of Rahu prior to

> Amrit incident.But how can Rahu retain its former drishti after

> shifting to a new position.I believe these may be aspects by

virtue

> of its new position.I could assume this only because of your own

> explanations.

>

> Anil:Your logic reminded me a story from panch-tantra.When a

crocodile

> wanted to eat the heart of a monkey,Monkey said it is on the tree.

> Crocodile

> took him back to tree and monkey's life was saved.Are you trying to

> say

> similar thing that Rahu left his eyes/aspects at its old location?

> Again

> it was just a comment to support the view that superior planets have

> additional aspects.If additional aspects are just because of being

> superior

> then only this argument is good but we do not know the real reason.

> One reason may be that due to bigger size of superior planets,they

are

> capable of receiving light from more directions and hence have more

> aspects.

> You might have read a news few times in past 12 years that a big

> fireball

> of size 10-20 times earth, came out from Sun and went in space.

Once

> we

> call Soory as Soory Narayan and fireball as Sudarshan Chakr

everything

> looks quite obvious in Rahu's story.

>

> You have mentioned about Rahu absorbing or obstructing the light

of

> other planets.So if we to aspects of Rahu ,does that

mean

> it can obstruct the light of other planets from reaching on to the

> 'houses' on which Rahu casts an aspect?This may be possible by

virtue

> of angular dispositions. Rahu apart from having an influence on

the

> house in which he is situated can block other houses as well. Now

if

> we consider Rahu as a Nodal point and not as remains of a huge

planet

> how can it obstruct? Absorption is understandable.But in this case

as

> well it could absorb a certain % of light and thereby block

certain

> houses,including the one on which it is placed.

>

> Anil:Please note that Rahu is just a shadow.It can block the light

> only

> for the area on which shadow falls. So it can not block any house

or

> planet in totality.You know that eclipses are not visible at all

> places

> on earth. So no shadow means no blocking.

>

> Now whether Rahu can cast an aspect or not in either of the above

> cases depends on certain other conditions.For example consider

that

> Rahu was not present and then which all planets might have cast an

> aspect(light) on the concerned houses.Now consider whether Rahu is

> ahead or behind of these planets in degrees.Only if it is ahead of

> any planet then it could cast an aspect(prevent aspects) on the

> concerned houses.Am i right?

>

> Anil:Aspect do not mean light.We can see an object because light

> coming

> from it reaches our eyes.So it is the light of other planets which

> reaches

> Rahu. We can then say that they are aspected by Rahu!

>

> Also you have mentioned deepansh.Is this the degree upto which a

> planet can reflect light? Then in that case if Rahu is coming in

> between he is blocking or diverting certain amount of light and

> thereby reducing the deepansh of other planets. Thus Rahu will not

> have aspects always but only if it is blocking the light of

others.Am

> i right?

>

> Anil:Yes. To understand Deeptansh(illuminated degrees),consider a

> candle

> burning in dark room.Now you take a book near candle and you can

read

> it.

> Now increase your distance from the candle and at some point you

will

> not

> be able to read it. The distance upto which you can read is the

> effective

> area of influence for candle/book.Similarly degrees upto which

planets

> can

> give their effect fully due to their light is called deeptansh.Here

> you can

> consider your book as Rahu as it has no light.This should also

clear

> your

> idea how interaction between two planets may be occuring.How much

area

> of

> candle you can cover by book will show the blockage of planet by

Rahu.

>

> Now Ketu.Here you have mentioned Ketu as numerous particles -

Dhooma

> Ketus in many orbits.If we are considering them as numerous how

can

> we pin point this to one Ketu? Thanks a lot in advance. Respect

> Pradeep

>

> Anil:I was telling about commets/dhoom-ketus which have physical

> existance.

> As you know Ketu is also a shadow planet like Rahu,this one is not

> present

> in physical Dhoom-ketus.So what is applicable to Rahu as

shadow,that

> is

> also applicable to Ketu as shadow.consider them as shadows in two

> opposit directions.

>

> Hope this clears your doubts.

>

> Anilkumar

>

> OM TAT SAT

> --