Rashi Divisions - More thoughts/Shri Sanjay Prabhakaran

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Sanjay Prabhakaran

 

Thanks for your mail and trying to understand me.

Inspite of myself repeating umpteen times to construct a chart

manually,no one has cared to.If you had done so,you would have never

come up with this kind of an assumption/model.

 

So you say there are many circles and first circle is D-1,second is

D-2 and 9th is D-9.Assume we are living in an age without any

software.Take for example Jupiter at 7 degrees in dhanu.Tell me as

per your theory how do we find the navamsha, Hora and drekkana for

this planet.We know that,for any point in time, any planet or lagna

can simultaneously have a

Kshethra/Hora/Drekkana..../Shastyamsha/Nadyamsha.../etc.Please

explain in which circle my planet is situated and how to find other

amshas.Also as per Parashara any rashi of 30 degrees will have 9

navamshas,each of 3.20 degrees and 3 drekkanas each of 10

degrees.How do you explain these using your model.I can explain you

how to derive any amsha of a planet or lagna as defined by sage.

 

If you or any other in this list can explain me using your model,i

will accept your theory.If not, i just have one request.If you are

really sincere,you should be kind enough to request shri Sanjay

Rath, to explain how to construct a varga manually and explain how

aspects and houses are possible using any model.

 

As Sage has not told, if parampara has such knowledge,we should know

how.Why dont you ask for once, just once,a single time (i beg in the

name of astrology) to Shri SanjayRath to explain.If he has

understood this,definitely we will get an explanation.I count on

your intellectual honesty and expect not to withdraw in between.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

vedic astrology, "sanjayprabhakaran"

<sanjaychettiar@g...> wrote:

> || Om Gurave Namah ||

> Dear Vijay,

>

> My Understanding of what you wrote is that you are assuming that

> Rashi or Zodiac is just one circle. And Divisionals are just seeing

> degrees or breaking up of arcs on the circumference.

>

> But if you think Zodiac to be Circles within circles within

circles

> etc. You would get a picture of something like Spiraling (multiple

> spirals).

>

> For example in Navamsa By the time you make one circle you already

> made 9 self circles or sub circles.

>

> Each Circle is zodiac, The whole big circle is also a zodiac and

sub

> circles are also zodiac. Think of this like a Spring of 9 circles

> strung around to from another big cycle.

>

> Subcircles can aspect each other other within same subcircle, since

> they are in same 'circumference', So Divisionals planets can aspect

> each other in that mutual sub circle. This is just one way of

> understanding is what I propose.

>

> I hope I dint complicate my language.

>

> Ofcourse the Maharishi's dont explain it this way, but they used

> recursive language like "Vritta Trayam Trayam" (Circle Trice

Trice ) etc.

>

> Texts and Various Yantras show them like petals within zones. One

has

> to meditate on all those yantra to get a better picture.

> The Rashi Chart itself is drawn as Yantra.

>

> Warm Regards

> Sanjay P.

>

> Hari Om Tat Sat

>

>

>

> vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > Dear Respected members

> >

> > I am posting something written for another list.

> >

> > Rashi/Kshethra/Bhava etc being used with interchange by

translators

> > is a reason for confusion.Bhava and the first division of a Rashi

> > having similar boundaries added more to it.Rashi as a first

> > division, and Rashi as an aadhara for bhava,though same, has to

be

> > understood and analysed differently.When we percieve them as an

> > aadhara for bhavas we can apply house concept ,aspects, various

> > lagnas like - bhavat bhavam,karakamsha,surya,chandra,navamsha

etc.

> > When we use them as the first division we can just see the

kshethra

> > of various bhavanathas and their lords for the purpose given by

> > sage.Kendras as you have said is a 90 degree relationship.Aries

> > amsha from Aries Rashi and cancer amsha from taurus rashi when

> > arranged together, cannot form kendras.

> >

> > The role any planet is supposed to play can be broadly classified

> > under 1) Bhavas they lord 2)Natural Karakatwas.

> > Karakatwas are independent of the chart while bhava lordships are

> > dependent.A planet is subjected to broader and finer

environmental

> > influences called as divisions of a Rashi.These finer

environments

> > may also be holding a clue about past life and desires. 9th

lord's

> > divisions explaining devotional levels, even of past life,makes

one

> > think like that.Here one can find that 9th lord is not belonging

to

> > any division,but to the rashi chakra, forming an aadhara for

> > bhavas.9th lords vimshamsha may be the main amsha to be seen for

> > these matters.

> >

> > For the same reason, each and every division, (or divisional

chart -

> > if one wants to arrange them together), can be constructed from

> > Rashi chakra.If Rashi chakra is just the first division, how can

we

> > find subsequent divisions from a division itself.Also for the

same

> > reason we can see every aspect pertaining to a jataka from the

Rashi

> > chakra using bhavat bhavam and various lagnas.How can one see

> > everything,if it is just a division.Thus my understanding is -

Rashi

> > chakra is not the Division -1, but each rashi is. Any 1/9th of

any

> > rashi is a Division-9.Parashara too has said the same while

> > explaining various divisions of a Rashi.

> >

> > Others who have understood this better, may ignore my views.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

[Guest guest]

|| Om Gurave Namah ||

 

Dear Pradeep,

 

Namaste,

I tried to re-read your mail many times and it was difficult for me

to understand all of what you were exactly trying to say. (like

'aadhara' etc)

 

When I learnt about using the division sitting with Narasimhaji,

Sanjayji and also from many books I just went by the way they were

using it.

 

i.e to use the constructed divisional chart like a seperate chart by

it self and also try to see where a relevant lord of Rashi is place in

the divisional etc etc etc. In fact calculation of Narayana dasa of

Divisional is so much dependant on taking the relevant house lord of

Rashi and see it in division, as you have also said in you mail.

 

Whenever in doubt or unable to find to exact logic, follow what is

mentioned by Maharishi's traditionally handed over. Is what I have

been told. My theories are more to understand the Maharishi's words. I

may be wrong in forming complete coherent theory, But when it comes to

construction and usage, I am quite confident of the way to use it. But

the answer may not be just one. There could be more than one way to do

it. Which I am open to.

 

As to your question of how the Varga has to be calculated, It's

already encoded in the software and also mentioned in many books. But

there can be more than one way to make certain division is what I

understand, Like for example D3 is mentioned by Krisheeyam in very

different way. Each construction may give a different type results.

 

If you have any questions for Sanjayji I think you can also send him

personal email or meet him and address the question.

 

Anway my point of my email was just to put aware all the readers that

basic construction of the chart is quite common and used by pundits

and many software quite accurately.

 

I am sorry if this mail may not have answered all question your

posed, But then it becomes diffcult for me explain my whole views thru

emails.

 

 

Warm Regards

Sanjay P.

 

Hari Om Tat Sat

 

 

vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> Dear Shri Sanjay Prabhakaran

>

> Thanks for your mail and trying to understand me.

> Inspite of myself repeating umpteen times to construct a chart

> manually,no one has cared to.If you had done so,you would have never

> come up with this kind of an assumption/model.

>

> So you say there are many circles and first circle is D-1,second is

> D-2 and 9th is D-9.Assume we are living in an age without any

> software.Take for example Jupiter at 7 degrees in dhanu.Tell me as

> per your theory how do we find the navamsha, Hora and drekkana for

> this planet.We know that,for any point in time, any planet or lagna

> can simultaneously have a

> Kshethra/Hora/Drekkana..../Shastyamsha/Nadyamsha.../etc.Please

> explain in which circle my planet is situated and how to find other

> amshas.Also as per Parashara any rashi of 30 degrees will have 9

> navamshas,each of 3.20 degrees and 3 drekkanas each of 10

> degrees.How do you explain these using your model.I can explain you

> how to derive any amsha of a planet or lagna as defined by sage.

>

> If you or any other in this list can explain me using your model,i

> will accept your theory.If not, i just have one request.If you are

> really sincere,you should be kind enough to request shri Sanjay

> Rath, to explain how to construct a varga manually and explain how

> aspects and houses are possible using any model.

>

> As Sage has not told, if parampara has such knowledge,we should know

> how.Why dont you ask for once, just once,a single time (i beg in the

> name of astrology) to Shri SanjayRath to explain.If he has

> understood this,definitely we will get an explanation.I count on

> your intellectual honesty and expect not to withdraw in between.

>

> Thanks

> Pradeep

>

> vedic astrology, "sanjayprabhakaran"

> <sanjaychettiar@g...> wrote:

> > || Om Gurave Namah ||

> > Dear Vijay,

> >

> > My Understanding of what you wrote is that you are assuming that

> > Rashi or Zodiac is just one circle. And Divisionals are just seeing

> > degrees or breaking up of arcs on the circumference.

> >

> > But if you think Zodiac to be Circles within circles within

> circles

> > etc. You would get a picture of something like Spiraling (multiple

> > spirals).

> >

> > For example in Navamsa By the time you make one circle you already

> > made 9 self circles or sub circles.

> >

> > Each Circle is zodiac, The whole big circle is also a zodiac and

> sub

> > circles are also zodiac. Think of this like a Spring of 9 circles

> > strung around to from another big cycle.

> >

> > Subcircles can aspect each other other within same subcircle, since

> > they are in same 'circumference', So Divisionals planets can aspect

> > each other in that mutual sub circle. This is just one way of

> > understanding is what I propose.

> >

> > I hope I dint complicate my language.

> >

> > Ofcourse the Maharishi's dont explain it this way, but they used

> > recursive language like "Vritta Trayam Trayam" (Circle Trice

> Trice ) etc.

> >

> > Texts and Various Yantras show them like petals within zones. One

> has

> > to meditate on all those yantra to get a better picture.

> > The Rashi Chart itself is drawn as Yantra.

> >

> > Warm Regards

> > Sanjay P.

> >

> > Hari Om Tat Sat

> >

> >

> >

> > vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > > Dear Respected members

> > >

> > > I am posting something written for another list.

> > >

> > > Rashi/Kshethra/Bhava etc being used with interchange by

> translators

> > > is a reason for confusion.Bhava and the first division of a Rashi

> > > having similar boundaries added more to it.Rashi as a first

> > > division, and Rashi as an aadhara for bhava,though same, has to

> be

> > > understood and analysed differently.When we percieve them as an

> > > aadhara for bhavas we can apply house concept ,aspects, various

> > > lagnas like - bhavat bhavam,karakamsha,surya,chandra,navamsha

> etc.

> > > When we use them as the first division we can just see the

> kshethra

> > > of various bhavanathas and their lords for the purpose given by

> > > sage.Kendras as you have said is a 90 degree relationship.Aries

> > > amsha from Aries Rashi and cancer amsha from taurus rashi when

> > > arranged together, cannot form kendras.

> > >

> > > The role any planet is supposed to play can be broadly classified

> > > under 1) Bhavas they lord 2)Natural Karakatwas.

> > > Karakatwas are independent of the chart while bhava lordships are

> > > dependent.A planet is subjected to broader and finer

> environmental

> > > influences called as divisions of a Rashi.These finer

> environments

> > > may also be holding a clue about past life and desires. 9th

> lord's

> > > divisions explaining devotional levels, even of past life,makes

> one

> > > think like that.Here one can find that 9th lord is not belonging

> to

> > > any division,but to the rashi chakra, forming an aadhara for

> > > bhavas.9th lords vimshamsha may be the main amsha to be seen for

> > > these matters.

> > >

> > > For the same reason, each and every division, (or divisional

> chart -

> > > if one wants to arrange them together), can be constructed from

> > > Rashi chakra.If Rashi chakra is just the first division, how can

> we

> > > find subsequent divisions from a division itself.Also for the

> same

> > > reason we can see every aspect pertaining to a jataka from the

> Rashi

> > > chakra using bhavat bhavam and various lagnas.How can one see

> > > everything,if it is just a division.Thus my understanding is -

> Rashi

> > > chakra is not the Division -1, but each rashi is. Any 1/9th of

> any

> > > rashi is a Division-9.Parashara too has said the same while

> > > explaining various divisions of a Rashi.

> > >

> > > Others who have understood this better, may ignore my views.

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > > Pradeep

[Guest guest]

Dear shri Sanjay

 

Thanks for your mail.

Aadhara is something which forms a basis.For example alphabets are

aadharas for language.

 

My point was not on how to construct vargas.Trying to construct them

manually,involves visualisation of zodiac as advised by sage.Thus we

will understand why aspects and houses are not possible.Then we will

undersrtand why we do not have a single shloka from sage on this

matter.

 

Please explain how can we see the nine divisions of a rashi with

your model.

 

I respect Yantra ,Tantra ,Mantra and each has got its own value.But

when we ask the quantity of rice we cannot say wheat is 5 kg.Mixing

philosophy everywhere is an easy way but not an answer to specific

questions.Discretion is very important.There can be a philosophical

part behind formation of vargas.But construction is purely

astronomical and logical,else a computer cannot do it.

 

I had requested this to shri Rath.I did not get an answer.As you are

a student since many years,he may answer your questions.Thus my

request.

 

Differences can be only on who lords a drekkana.Drekkana remains one

third of a rashi always.Thus with a spiral model it is not possible

at all.I am not against you, but there is a visible trend among many

to make specific things as general, and get away.

 

As i have said ,differences can be only regarding the lordships in

vargas, but the astronomical part is clear.Do you have any idea why

sjc site considers graha drishti as disputable.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

 

vedic astrology, "sanjayprabhakaran"

<sanjaychettiar@g...> wrote:

> || Om Gurave Namah ||

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> Namaste,

> I tried to re-read your mail many times and it was difficult for

me

> to understand all of what you were exactly trying to say. (like

> 'aadhara' etc)

>

> When I learnt about using the division sitting with Narasimhaji,

> Sanjayji and also from many books I just went by the way they were

> using it.

>

> i.e to use the constructed divisional chart like a seperate chart

by

> it self and also try to see where a relevant lord of Rashi is

place in

> the divisional etc etc etc. In fact calculation of Narayana dasa of

> Divisional is so much dependant on taking the relevant house lord

of

> Rashi and see it in division, as you have also said in you mail.

>

> Whenever in doubt or unable to find to exact logic, follow what is

> mentioned by Maharishi's traditionally handed over. Is what I have

> been told. My theories are more to understand the Maharishi's

words. I

> may be wrong in forming complete coherent theory, But when it

comes to

> construction and usage, I am quite confident of the way to use it.

But

> the answer may not be just one. There could be more than one way

to do

> it. Which I am open to.

>

> As to your question of how the Varga has to be calculated, It's

> already encoded in the software and also mentioned in many books.

But

> there can be more than one way to make certain division is what I

> understand, Like for example D3 is mentioned by Krisheeyam in very

> different way. Each construction may give a different type results.

>

> If you have any questions for Sanjayji I think you can also send

him

> personal email or meet him and address the question.

>

> Anway my point of my email was just to put aware all the readers

that

> basic construction of the chart is quite common and used by pundits

> and many software quite accurately.

>

> I am sorry if this mail may not have answered all question your

> posed, But then it becomes diffcult for me explain my whole views

thru

> emails.

>

>

> Warm Regards

> Sanjay P.

>

> Hari Om Tat Sat

>

>

> vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > Dear Shri Sanjay Prabhakaran

> >

> > Thanks for your mail and trying to understand me.

> > Inspite of myself repeating umpteen times to construct a chart

> > manually,no one has cared to.If you had done so,you would have

never

> > come up with this kind of an assumption/model.

> >

> > So you say there are many circles and first circle is D-1,second

is

> > D-2 and 9th is D-9.Assume we are living in an age without any

> > software.Take for example Jupiter at 7 degrees in dhanu.Tell me

as

> > per your theory how do we find the navamsha, Hora and drekkana

for

> > this planet.We know that,for any point in time, any planet or

lagna

> > can simultaneously have a

> > Kshethra/Hora/Drekkana..../Shastyamsha/Nadyamsha.../etc.Please

> > explain in which circle my planet is situated and how to find

other

> > amshas.Also as per Parashara any rashi of 30 degrees will have 9

> > navamshas,each of 3.20 degrees and 3 drekkanas each of 10

> > degrees.How do you explain these using your model.I can explain

you

> > how to derive any amsha of a planet or lagna as defined by sage.

> >

> > If you or any other in this list can explain me using your

model,i

> > will accept your theory.If not, i just have one request.If you

are

> > really sincere,you should be kind enough to request shri Sanjay

> > Rath, to explain how to construct a varga manually and explain

how

> > aspects and houses are possible using any model.

> >

> > As Sage has not told, if parampara has such knowledge,we should

know

> > how.Why dont you ask for once, just once,a single time (i beg in

the

> > name of astrology) to Shri SanjayRath to explain.If he has

> > understood this,definitely we will get an explanation.I count on

> > your intellectual honesty and expect not to withdraw in between.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

> >

> > vedic astrology, "sanjayprabhakaran"

> > <sanjaychettiar@g...> wrote:

> > > || Om Gurave Namah ||

> > > Dear Vijay,

> > >

> > > My Understanding of what you wrote is that you are assuming

that

> > > Rashi or Zodiac is just one circle. And Divisionals are just

seeing

> > > degrees or breaking up of arcs on the circumference.

> > >

> > > But if you think Zodiac to be Circles within circles within

> > circles

> > > etc. You would get a picture of something like Spiraling

(multiple

> > > spirals).

> > >

> > > For example in Navamsa By the time you make one circle you

already

> > > made 9 self circles or sub circles.

> > >

> > > Each Circle is zodiac, The whole big circle is also a zodiac

and

> > sub

> > > circles are also zodiac. Think of this like a Spring of 9

circles

> > > strung around to from another big cycle.

> > >

> > > Subcircles can aspect each other other within same subcircle,

since

> > > they are in same 'circumference', So Divisionals planets can

aspect

> > > each other in that mutual sub circle. This is just one way of

> > > understanding is what I propose.

> > >

> > > I hope I dint complicate my language.

> > >

> > > Ofcourse the Maharishi's dont explain it this way, but they

used

> > > recursive language like "Vritta Trayam Trayam" (Circle Trice

> > Trice ) etc.

> > >

> > > Texts and Various Yantras show them like petals within zones.

One

> > has

> > > to meditate on all those yantra to get a better picture.

> > > The Rashi Chart itself is drawn as Yantra.

> > >

> > > Warm Regards

> > > Sanjay P.

> > >

> > > Hari Om Tat Sat

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > > > Dear Respected members

> > > >

> > > > I am posting something written for another list.

> > > >

> > > > Rashi/Kshethra/Bhava etc being used with interchange by

> > translators

> > > > is a reason for confusion.Bhava and the first division of a

Rashi

> > > > having similar boundaries added more to it.Rashi as a first

> > > > division, and Rashi as an aadhara for bhava,though same, has

to

> > be

> > > > understood and analysed differently.When we percieve them as

an

> > > > aadhara for bhavas we can apply house concept ,aspects,

various

> > > > lagnas like - bhavat

bhavam,karakamsha,surya,chandra,navamsha

> > etc.

> > > > When we use them as the first division we can just see the

> > kshethra

> > > > of various bhavanathas and their lords for the purpose given

by

> > > > sage.Kendras as you have said is a 90 degree

relationship.Aries

> > > > amsha from Aries Rashi and cancer amsha from taurus rashi

when

> > > > arranged together, cannot form kendras.

> > > >

> > > > The role any planet is supposed to play can be broadly

classified

> > > > under 1) Bhavas they lord 2)Natural Karakatwas.

> > > > Karakatwas are independent of the chart while bhava

lordships are

> > > > dependent.A planet is subjected to broader and finer

> > environmental

> > > > influences called as divisions of a Rashi.These finer

> > environments

> > > > may also be holding a clue about past life and desires. 9th

> > lord's

> > > > divisions explaining devotional levels, even of past

life,makes

> > one

> > > > think like that.Here one can find that 9th lord is not

belonging

> > to

> > > > any division,but to the rashi chakra, forming an aadhara for

> > > > bhavas.9th lords vimshamsha may be the main amsha to be seen

for

> > > > these matters.

> > > >

> > > > For the same reason, each and every division, (or divisional

> > chart -

> > > > if one wants to arrange them together), can be constructed

from

> > > > Rashi chakra.If Rashi chakra is just the first division, how

can

> > we

> > > > find subsequent divisions from a division itself.Also for

the

> > same

> > > > reason we can see every aspect pertaining to a jataka from

the

> > Rashi

> > > > chakra using bhavat bhavam and various lagnas.How can one see

> > > > everything,if it is just a division.Thus my understanding

is -

> > Rashi

> > > > chakra is not the Division -1, but each rashi is. Any 1/9th

of

> > any

> > > > rashi is a Division-9.Parashara too has said the same while

> > > > explaining various divisions of a Rashi.

> > > >

> > > > Others who have understood this better, may ignore my views.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > > Pradeep