Doubt in Jagannath hora sw/Narasimha ji

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha ji

 

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> The fact of the matter is that several generations of astrologers

have been using houses in divisional charts in our tradition. It is

not our invention.

>

 

You are well read and far learned than me.Also your approach has been

appealing to me in dealing with matters like dishonesty and all.Praise

of dishonesty is neither beneficial nor due to love.All of us makes

mistakes and needs some one to correct.

 

Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in Rashi

chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that traditional

knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by contemporary

jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the truth.

 

You may aslo think why one has to struggle a lot when encountered with

Rahu/Ketu in the divisions.As you are well read you will understand

that initial versions of classics did not assign any lordships for nodes.

 

Rahu/Ketu are malefics ,because of extreme nature.They just give in

extremes depending on their associations.

 

I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years have done

so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

 

 

 

> Though my knowledge is limited, several people have found the

>lessons useful and benefited from it. You may want to try the >lessons.

 

I respect your efforts.But for me,basics underlying integration and

differentiation has to be clear before i use them for higher research.

First we have to answer how it is possile to use, before using them.

As you know, there is neither any classical reference nor any

technical possibility.It is full of inconsistencies - like trines

possile,aspect not possile etc.

 

My humle feeling is navamsha lagna,chandra lagna,suryalagna,dashamsha

lagna,karakamsha lagna etc are different reference ponits w.r to a

single set of planetary positions in space.

 

It is not possile to delink or isolate something - as we do in the

case of divisional charts.For the same reason narayana dasha keeps the

root contact.

 

For the same reason i support shri Raojis view of finding karakamsha

lagna in rashi chakra.Strictly speaking everything falls under rashi

chakra,all the amshas are subtle parts of the same BODY.

I need not explain all these to you,as you are aware that all amshas

are derived from the rashi chakra.Karakasmha just finds the root amsha

and the full sign representing that amsha becomes the lagna.

 

 

Respect

Pradeep

[Guest guest]

Namaste Pradeep,

 

> I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

> divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years have

done

> so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

 

Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have

used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works, they DID

use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

 

Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

tradition.

 

Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

promote your personal biases.

 

> Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in

Rashi

> chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

> mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

traditional

> knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

contemporary

> jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

truth.

 

If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your point

home, you made a choice!

 

Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart, some

are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example, Narayana

dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet owning the

9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from father,

Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

see the events happening to father.

 

Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house lords of

rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing the

start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of rasi

chart determine the starting position.

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

-------------------------------

Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

-------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha ji Namaste

 

It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal bias.

When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even before

the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav

''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one

needs to be skeptical about the traditional part.

 

Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of navamshas as a chart similar

to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even profession was seen from 10th

house in navamsha.

Now suppose if i use them for my spouse(combining parasharas advise

with your advise(usage of houses)) - are'nt we going to see the same

results for me and my spouse.Thus i request, not to feel offended by

my comments.

 

If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.

As Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi

chakra, before making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''

only as a secondary source,it has not made any negative impacts on his

works/predictions.

 

Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may have to

point your attention towards the weakness,as well.

But if you feel you are doing justice to your conscience after reading

all the materials,it is completely alright.

As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards

perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual discretions

and mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.

 

 

Respect

Pradeep

 

 

 

vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> > I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

> > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years have

> done

> > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

>

> Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have

> used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works, they DID

> use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

> known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

>

> Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> tradition.

>

> Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

> expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

> offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

> promote your personal biases.

>

> > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in

> Rashi

> > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

> > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

> traditional

> > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

> contemporary

> > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> truth.

>

> If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your point

> home, you made a choice!

>

> Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

> divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart, some

> are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example, Narayana

> dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet owning the

> 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from father,

> Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

> see the events happening to father.

>

> Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house lords of

> rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing the

> start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

> start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

> divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of rasi

> chart determine the starting position.

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

[Guest guest]

If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

 

 

Pls read ''not spouses'' as ''not houses''.

 

vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> Dear Narasimha ji Namaste

>

> It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal bias.

> When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even before

> the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav

> ''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one

> needs to be skeptical about the traditional part.

>

> Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of navamshas as a chart similar

> to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even profession was seen from 10th

> house in navamsha.

> Now suppose if i use them for my spouse(combining parasharas advise

> with your advise(usage of houses)) - are'nt we going to see the same

> results for me and my spouse.Thus i request, not to feel offended by

> my comments.

>

> If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

> spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

> Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.

> As Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi

> chakra, before making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''

> only as a secondary source,it has not made any negative impacts on his

> works/predictions.

>

> Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may have to

> point your attention towards the weakness,as well.

> But if you feel you are doing justice to your conscience after reading

> all the materials,it is completely alright.

> As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards

> perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual discretions

> and mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.

>

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

>

>

> vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

> > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years have

> > done

> > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

> >

> > Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have

> > used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works, they DID

> > use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

> > known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

> >

> > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > tradition.

> >

> > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

> > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

> > offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

> > promote your personal biases.

> >

> > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in

> > Rashi

> > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

> > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

> > traditional

> > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

> > contemporary

> > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > truth.

> >

> > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your point

> > home, you made a choice!

> >

> > Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

> > divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart, some

> > are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example, Narayana

> > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet owning the

> > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from father,

> > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

> > see the events happening to father.

> >

> > Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house lords of

> > rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing the

> > start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

> > start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

> > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of rasi

> > chart determine the starting position.

> >

> > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > Narasimha

> > -------------------------------

> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > -------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Namaste Vijaydas,

 

Again a very nicely written post. I agree with your viewpoints and I

went back and looked for references where sage has mentioned bhavas in

amshas. Everyplace he talks about bhavas he seems to be referring to

the main rashi kundali.

 

Narasimha,

 

I think the point being made here is where is the Pararashar's saction

of using bhavas in amshas. The point is not whether Raman used them or

KNRao used them. What Vijaydas is asking is where is the reference in

the classics. You have mentioned many times that Parashar is the

greatest authority on jyotish so lets use his work in BPHS as the

reference.

 

I had mentioned about one Mr V.D. Bhat one of the most celebrated

jyotishi of the past 25 years in western Maharashtra. he has a track

record of fantanstic prediction in natal horoscopy. He is a legend. He

uses Uranus and Neptune and his books, all in marathi, are full of

references to uranus and neptune. He uses even dashas sparingly. He

has developed a jyotish drishti for these combinations. Mr. Gogate of

this list is familiar with his works. Now that is his method but it

has NO classical standing. Parashar did not mention uranus or neptune.

So if someone from his school starts using these outer planets ( BTW,

all of his students use them) and are making accurate predictions in

high percentage of cases all power to them. But again there is no

classical reference to it.

 

The question Vijaydas has been asking is where is the classical

reference to using amshas as houses ? You have mentioned that SJC did

not invent these divisional charts. I am glad that you said that

because anyone who has questioned the use of them has been grouped

into someone who is against SJC.So much so that some beleive it as a

SJC tradition.

 

Also many just say that what is not seen in the rashi chart won't be

given by divioans/divisioanl charts. But how many actually practice it

that way. My question is why not go only to rashi chart to see what is

promised by rashi chart. If it can not be seen in rashi chart, how can

it be seen in divisions ( except for the strength of the graha). To

say that there are many significations for the houses and one has to

go to the divisionals to see the real picture is inexperience of not

seeing the thing in rashi chart. The jyotishi I mentioned does not

have to go to divisionals to see things clearly. he has many subtle

reference points, like for spouse, just by seeing shukra in simha he

has drawn a few conclusions, then the seventh lord..etc. etc. If we

spend our time to deeply understand the rashi chart from a couple of

reference points and master that, it is enough to answer most of the

questions people have.

 

Yes, that leaves the question of twins, that has been brought up

everytime this discussion is going on. I have not seen much evidence

that divisional charts can conclusively predict for twins. It is not a

proven fact nor a forgone conclusion. From a practical standpoint the

number of people who are twins is so miniscule that it is but an

academic excercise for me. Maybe its a good research topic unless

someone is claming to have solved that riddle.

 

with respects

 

....

 

On 7/13/05, vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> Dear Narasimha ji Namaste

>

> It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal bias.

> When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even before

> the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav

> ''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one

> needs to be skeptical about the traditional part.

>

> Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of navamshas as a chart similar

> to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even profession was seen from 10th

> house in navamsha.

> Now suppose if i use them for my spouse(combining parasharas advise

> with your advise(usage of houses)) - are'nt we going to see the same

> results for me and my spouse.Thus i request, not to feel offended by

> my comments.

>

> If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

> spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

> Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.

> As Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi

> chakra, before making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''

> only as a secondary source,it has not made any negative impacts on his

> works/predictions.

>

> Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may have to

> point your attention towards the weakness,as well.

> But if you feel you are doing justice to your conscience after reading

> all the materials,it is completely alright.

> As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards

> perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual discretions

> and mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.

>

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

>

>

>

> vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

> > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years have

> > done

> > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

> >

> > Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have

> > used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works, they DID

> > use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

> > known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

> >

> > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > tradition.

> >

> > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

> > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

> > offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

> > promote your personal biases.

> >

> > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in

> > Rashi

> > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

> > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

> > traditional

> > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

> > contemporary

> > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > truth.

> >

> > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your point

> > home, you made a choice!

> >

> > Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

> > divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart, some

> > are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example, Narayana

> > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet owning the

> > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from father,

> > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

> > see the events happening to father.

> >

> > Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house lords of

> > rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing the

> > start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

> > start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

> > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of rasi

> > chart determine the starting position.

> >

> > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > Narasimha

> >

> -------------------------------

> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3):

> http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> >

> -------------------------------

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Group info:

> vedic astrology/info.html

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to

> vedic astrology-

>

> ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

>

>

>

>

> ________________________________

>

>

> Visit your group "vedic astrology" on the web.

>

>

> vedic astrology

>

>

> ________________________________

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Pradeep,

 

You went on ad naseum without addressing my main point.

 

You yourself acknowledged that Dr Raman used houses in navamsa. What then makes

you say that taking houses in navamsa is "raw or first level attempt" and

"trial"? If you call it "suspicious" or "questionable", I can respect your

view. But the words you used imply that this is some kind of new practice,

which it is not.

 

I am not interested in an argument with you on the relative importance of rasi

and navamsa. That is a different argument. My point now is very specific. How

can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw or first level attempt" and

"trial" after so many decades (if not centuries) of that practice by learned

Jyotishis such as Dr Raman? And, who are you make that judgment and use such

strong words?

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

-------------------------------Free Jyotish

lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.netFree Jyotish software

(Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website:

http://www.SriJagannath.org-------------------------------

 

> Dear Narasimha ji Namaste> > It is not at all an extreme position or promotion

of any personal bias.> When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards

,even before> the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav>

''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one> needs to

be skeptical about the traditional part.> > Dr.Raman, if we note, had used

group of navamshas as a chart similar> to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even

profession was seen from 10th> house in navamsha.> Now suppose if i use them for

my spouse(combining parasharas advise> with your advise(usage of houses)) -

are'nt we going to see the same> results for me and my spouse.Thus i request,

not to feel offended by> my comments. > > If we read classics,we can find

navamsha being considered (not> spouses)before arriving at results for bhava

lords.> Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.> As

Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi> chakra, before

making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''> only as a secondary

source,it has not made any negative impacts on his> works/predictions. > >

Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may have to> point

your attention towards the weakness,as well.> But if you feel you are doing

justice to your conscience after reading> all the materials,it is completely

alright.> As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards>

perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual discretions> and

mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.> > > Respect> Pradeep>

> > > vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:> >

Namaste Pradeep,> > > > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over

treatment of> > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years

have > > done> > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.> > > > Not many, only

some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have > > used dasamsa etc

heavily in their publicly available works, they DID > > use navamsa and did use

houses in it. In fact, most of the well-> > known scholars I know did use houses

in navamsa.> > > > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > tradition.> > > > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your

use of > > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that > >

offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to > > promote your

personal biases.> > > > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why

Bhava in > > Rashi> > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara

you have> > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that > >

traditional> > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by > >

contemporary> > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > truth.> > > > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your

point > > home, you made a choice!> > > > Narayana dasa has umpteen

variations. While some variations of > > divisional Narayana dasa are based on

the houses in rasi chart, some > > are based on houses in divisions themselves.

For example, Narayana > > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the

planet owning the > > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from

father, > > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

> > see the events happening to father.> > > > Even when we find a divisional

Narayana dasa based on house lords of > > rasi chart, we do use houses in

division. For example, seeing the > > start sign and "7th house" from it,

seeing the "9th house" from > > start sign etc are all done in the divisional

chart. Houses in > > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses

of rasi > > chart determine the starting position.> > > > May Jupiter's light

shine on us, > > Narasimha > >

-------------------------------> > Free

Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > Free Jyotish

software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > Sri Jagannath Centre

(SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> >

-------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Dear Panditji

 

I have only one point to say here, forget about twins, just think for

a second how many people are born every second every minute in India.

For a particular latitude belt, the navamsa wont change, in some

cases other divisionals also wont change. But they lead totally

different lives, one is born to a poor beggar, and another to a rich

person. One will be born in orthodox family, one in a liberal family,

different religions, castes, etc.

 

Can any astrologer by using the rasi chart alone guess the difference?

 

 

best wishes

partha

 

vedic astrology, Panditji <navagraha@g...>

wrote:

> Namaste Vijaydas,

>

> Again a very nicely written post. I agree with your viewpoints and I

> went back and looked for references where sage has mentioned bhavas

in

> amshas. Everyplace he talks about bhavas he seems to be referring to

> the main rashi kundali.

>

> Narasimha,

>

> I think the point being made here is where is the Pararashar's

saction

> of using bhavas in amshas. The point is not whether Raman used them

or

> KNRao used them. What Vijaydas is asking is where is the reference

in

> the classics. You have mentioned many times that Parashar is the

> greatest authority on jyotish so lets use his work in BPHS as the

> reference.

>

> I had mentioned about one Mr V.D. Bhat one of the most celebrated

> jyotishi of the past 25 years in western Maharashtra. he has a track

> record of fantanstic prediction in natal horoscopy. He is a legend.

He

> uses Uranus and Neptune and his books, all in marathi, are full of

> references to uranus and neptune. He uses even dashas sparingly. He

> has developed a jyotish drishti for these combinations. Mr. Gogate

of

> this list is familiar with his works. Now that is his method but it

> has NO classical standing. Parashar did not mention uranus or

neptune.

> So if someone from his school starts using these outer planets (

BTW,

> all of his students use them) and are making accurate predictions

in

> high percentage of cases all power to them. But again there is no

> classical reference to it.

>

> The question Vijaydas has been asking is where is the classical

> reference to using amshas as houses ? You have mentioned that SJC

did

> not invent these divisional charts. I am glad that you said that

> because anyone who has questioned the use of them has been grouped

> into someone who is against SJC.So much so that some beleive it as a

> SJC tradition.

>

> Also many just say that what is not seen in the rashi chart won't be

> given by divioans/divisioanl charts. But how many actually practice

it

> that way. My question is why not go only to rashi chart to see what

is

> promised by rashi chart. If it can not be seen in rashi chart, how

can

> it be seen in divisions ( except for the strength of the graha). To

> say that there are many significations for the houses and one has to

> go to the divisionals to see the real picture is inexperience of not

> seeing the thing in rashi chart. The jyotishi I mentioned does not

> have to go to divisionals to see things clearly. he has many subtle

> reference points, like for spouse, just by seeing shukra in simha he

> has drawn a few conclusions, then the seventh lord..etc. etc. If we

> spend our time to deeply understand the rashi chart from a couple of

> reference points and master that, it is enough to answer most of the

> questions people have.

>

> Yes, that leaves the question of twins, that has been brought up

> everytime this discussion is going on. I have not seen much evidence

> that divisional charts can conclusively predict for twins. It is

not a

> proven fact nor a forgone conclusion. From a practical standpoint

the

> number of people who are twins is so miniscule that it is but an

> academic excercise for me. Maybe its a good research topic unless

> someone is claming to have solved that riddle.

>

> with respects

>

> ...

>

> On 7/13/05, vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > Dear Narasimha ji Namaste

> >

> > It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal

bias.

> > When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even

before

> > the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav

> > ''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus

one

> > needs to be skeptical about the traditional part.

> >

> > Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of navamshas as a chart

similar

> > to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even profession was seen from

10th

> > house in navamsha.

> > Now suppose if i use them for my spouse(combining parasharas

advise

> > with your advise(usage of houses)) - are'nt we going to see the

same

> > results for me and my spouse.Thus i request, not to feel offended

by

> > my comments.

> >

> > If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

> > spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

> > Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.

> > As Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi

> > chakra, before making a prediction, and had used

navamsha ''chakra''

> > only as a secondary source,it has not made any negative impacts

on his

> > works/predictions.

> >

> > Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may

have to

> > point your attention towards the weakness,as well.

> > But if you feel you are doing justice to your conscience after

reading

> > all the materials,it is completely alright.

> > As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive

towards

> > perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual

discretions

> > and mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.

> >

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment

of

> > > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years

have

> > > done

> > > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

> > >

> > > Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not

have

> > > used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works,

they DID

> > > use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

> > > known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

> > >

> > > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > > tradition.

> > >

> > > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

> > > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

> > > offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

> > > promote your personal biases.

> > >

> > > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava

in

> > > Rashi

> > > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you

have

> > > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

> > > traditional

> > > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

> > > contemporary

> > > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > > truth.

> > >

> > > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your

point

> > > home, you made a choice!

> > >

> > > Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

> > > divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart,

some

> > > are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example,

Narayana

> > > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet

owning the

> > > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from

father,

> > > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used

to

> > > see the events happening to father.

> > >

> > > Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house

lords of

> > > rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing

the

> > > start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

> > > start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

> > > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of

rasi

> > > chart determine the starting position.

> > >

> > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > > Narasimha

> > >

> > -------------------------------

> > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3):

> > http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > >

> > -------------------------------

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Group info:

> > vedic astrology/info.html

> >

> > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to

> > vedic astrology-

> >

> > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ________________________________

> >

> >

> > Visit your group "vedic astrology" on the web.

> >

> >

> > vedic astrology

> >

> > Terms of

Service.

> > ________________________________

> >

[Guest guest]

If my understanding is ok, it's only on a latitude belt that all lagna-related

matters, divisional lagnas included, change quite drastically. I'll take an

example that should be familiar to you. The 23N latitude of your country runs

from roughly Kandla to Imphal. Now what belt of this latitude would have

unvarying navamshas?

 

I'm certain you've written something that I didn't quite fathom properly.

Correct?"V.Partha sarathy" <partvinu > wrote:

For a particular latitude belt, the navamsa wont change, in some cases other

divisionals also wont change.Energumen-----45.1% of all statistics are

wrongTired of

spam? Mail has the best spam protection around

[Guest guest]

Dear Energumen

 

What i meant was a range of latitude and longitude also.

best wishes

partha

 

 

vedic astrology, Energumen <vernalagnia>

wrote:

> Are you sure, dear Partha?

>

> If my understanding is ok, it's only on a latitude belt that all

lagna-related matters, divisional lagnas included, change quite

drastically. I'll take an example that should be familiar to you. The

23N latitude of your country runs from roughly Kandla to Imphal. Now

what belt of this latitude would have unvarying navamshas?

>

> I'm certain you've written something that I didn't quite fathom

properly. Correct?

>

> "V.Partha sarathy" <partvinu@g...> wrote:

> For a particular latitude belt, the navamsa wont change, in some

cases other divisionals also wont change.

>

> Energumen

>

> -----

> 45.1% of all statistics are wrong

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Jaya Jagannatha

 

Dear Vijaydas and Panditji,

Namaste

 

FYI below from Narada Samhita. References are made to amshas as well:

 

Namaste Vijaydas,

 

Again a very nicely written post. I agree with your viewpoints and I went back

and looked for references where sage has mentioned bhavas in amshas. Everyplace

he talks about bhavas he seems to be referring to the main rashi kundali.

 

हारेशरà¥à¤•à¥à¤·à¤¦à¤²à¤¸à¥à¤¥à¥ˆà¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥ दृषà¥à¤Ÿà¥‹

यà¥à¤•à¥à¤¤à¤ƒ शशी शà¥à¤­à¤ƒà¥¤

तà¥à¤°à¥à¤¯à¤‚शे

ततà¥à¤ªà¤¤à¤¿à¤®à¤¿à¤¤à¥à¤°à¤°à¥à¤•à¥à¤·à¤—तेरà¥à¤¯à¥à¤•à¥à¤¤à¥\

‡à¤•à¥à¤·à¤¿à¤¤à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¤¥à¤¾à¥¥à¥«à¥«à¥¤à¥¨à¥©à¥¬

 

दà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¦à¤¶à¤¾à¤‚शे फलं पà¥à¤°à¥‹à¤•à¥à¤¤à¤‚

नवांशे पà¥à¤¯à¤¥ कीरà¥à¤¤à¥à¤¯à¤¤à¥‡à¥¤

आरकà¥à¤·à¥‡à¤•à¥‹

वधरà¥à¤šà¤¿à¤°à¥à¤¨à¤¿à¤¯à¥à¤¦à¥à¤§à¤•à¥à¤¶à¤²à¥‹à¤°à¥à¤¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¨à¥\

॥५५।२३७

 

hÄreÅ›arká¹£adalasthaistu dṛṣṭo yuktaḥ Å›aśī Å›ubhaḥ|

tryaá¹Å›e tatpatimitrarká¹£agateryukteká¹£itastathÄ||55|236

 

dvÄdaÅ›Äá¹Å›e phalaá¹ proktaá¹ navÄá¹Å›e pyatha kÄ«rtyate|

Äraká¹£eko vadharucirniyuddhakuÅ›alorthavÄn||55|237

 

 

Love,

Swee

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

These are excellent discussions. As I found my name being referred I am adding some lines.

 

My Guru Shri V.D.Bhat and his elder brother Shri M.D. Bhat refined the classical

theories and formed their own methodology which is easy to use and most

importantly has been proved to be accurate not only for analyzing the past

events but for predicting future trends and events.

 

This methodology is very popular in maharashtra and adjoining states.

Unfortunately we do not have any forum and most of the students do astrology as

hobby. We give heavy emphasis on Aspects , Mahadasha and consider only Navmansha

and do not consider other divisional charts. We also consider aspects of

Herschel , Neptune very aggressively.

 

We do not adopt a theory because it is recommended by Guru or by some Sage, In

fact we found many classical literatures totally useless and irrelevant for

predictions. I can give many examples of this but I think that is not the

subject of this thread.

 

We use only one criteria - any theory which is being put forward must give

consistent results and should be useful as predictive tool and do not go

blindly because it has been recommended by a Guru or authority.

 

That does not mean we do not respect Guru or any of the sage, we take all their

teachings which stand test of time.

 

We are frank and honest about sharing our failures and there are no egos

associated or any other hidden agendas or professional interests which probably

helps in increasing effectiveness of the theory.

 

Unfortunately all the literature published by my Gurus is in Marathi and we are

attempting to translate these books in other languages.

 

Regards,

 

Anil

-

Panditji

vedic astrology

Thursday, July 14, 2005 5:02 AM

Re: [vedic astrology] Re: Doubt in Jagannath hora sw/Narasimha ji

Namaste Vijaydas,Again a very nicely written post. I agree with your viewpoints

and Iwent back and looked for references where sage has mentioned bhavas

inamshas. Everyplace he talks about bhavas he seems to be referring tothe main

rashi kundali.Narasimha,I think the point being made here is where is the

Pararashar's sactionof using bhavas in amshas. The point is not whether Raman

used them orKNRao used them. What Vijaydas is asking is where is the reference

inthe classics. You have mentioned many times that Parashar is thegreatest

authority on jyotish so lets use his work in BPHS as thereference.I had

mentioned about one Mr V.D. Bhat one of the most celebratedjyotishi of the past

25 years in western Maharashtra. he has a trackrecord of fantanstic prediction

in natal horoscopy. He is a legend. Heuses Uranus and Neptune and his books,

all in marathi, are full ofreferences to uranus and neptune. He uses even

dashas sparingly. Hehas developed a jyotish drishti for these combinations. Mr.

Gogate ofthis list is familiar with his works. Now that is his method but ithas

NO classical standing. Parashar did not mention uranus or neptune.So if someone

from his school starts using these outer planets ( BTW,all of his students use

them) and are making accurate predictions inhigh percentage of cases all power

to them. But again there is noclassical reference to it.The question Vijaydas

has been asking is where is the classicalreference to using amshas as houses ?

You have mentioned that SJC didnot invent these divisional charts. I am glad

that you said thatbecause anyone who has questioned the use of them has been

groupedinto someone who is against SJC.So much so that some beleive it as aSJC

tradition.Also many just say that what is not seen in the rashi chart won't

begiven by divioans/divisioanl charts. But how many actually practice itthat

way. My question is why not go only to rashi chart to see what ispromised by

rashi chart. If it can not be seen in rashi chart, how canit be seen in

divisions ( except for the strength of the graha). Tosay that there are many

significations for the houses and one has togo to the divisionals to see the

real picture is inexperience of notseeing the thing in rashi chart. The

jyotishi I mentioned does nothave to go to divisionals to see things clearly.

he has many subtlereference points, like for spouse, just by seeing shukra in

simha hehas drawn a few conclusions, then the seventh lord..etc. etc. If

wespend our time to deeply understand the rashi chart from a couple ofreference

points and master that, it is enough to answer most of thequestions people

have.Yes, that leaves the question of twins, that has been brought upeverytime

this discussion is going on. I have not seen much evidencethat divisional

charts can conclusively predict for twins. It is not aproven fact nor a forgone

conclusion. From a practical standpoint thenumber of people who are twins is so

miniscule that it is but anacademic excercise for me. Maybe its a good research

topic unlesssomeone is claming to have solved that riddle.with respects...On

7/13/05, vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep > wrote:> Dear Narasimha

ji Namaste> > It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal

bias.> When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even before>

the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav> ''amsha'' of

various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one> needs to be skeptical

about the traditional part.> > Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of

navamshas as a chart similar> to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even

profession was seen from 10th> house in navamsha.> Now suppose if i use them

for my spouse(combining parasharas advise> with your advise(usage of houses)) -

are'nt we going to see the same> results for me and my spouse.Thus i request,

not to feel offended by> my comments. > > If we read classics,we can find

navamsha being considered (not> spouses)before arriving at results for bhava

lords.> Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.> As

Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi> chakra, before

making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''> only as a secondary

source,it has not made any negative impacts on his> works/predictions. > >

Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may have to> point

your attention towards the weakness,as well.> But if you feel you are doing

justice to your conscience after reading> all the materials,it is completely

alright.> As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards>

perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual discretions> and

mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.> > > Respect> Pradeep>

> > > > vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:> >

Namaste Pradeep,> > > > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over

treatment of> > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years

have > > done> > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.> > > > Not many, only

some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have > > used dasamsa etc

heavily in their publicly available works, they DID > > use navamsa and did use

houses in it. In fact, most of the well-> > known scholars I know did use houses

in navamsa.> > > > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > tradition.> > > > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your

use of > > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that > >

offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to > > promote your

personal biases.> > > > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why

Bhava in > > Rashi> > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara

you have> > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that > >

traditional> > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by > >

contemporary> > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > truth.> > > > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your

point > > home, you made a choice!> > > > Narayana dasa has umpteen

variations. While some variations of > > divisional Narayana dasa are based on

the houses in rasi chart, some > > are based on houses in divisions themselves.

For example, Narayana > > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the

planet owning the > > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from

father, > > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

> > see the events happening to father.> > > > Even when we find a divisional

Narayana dasa based on house lords of > > rasi chart, we do use houses in

division. For example, seeing the > > start sign and "7th house" from it,

seeing the "9th house" from > > start sign etc are all done in the divisional

chart. Houses in > > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses

of rasi > > chart determine the starting position.> > > > May Jupiter's light

shine on us, > > Narasimha > >>

-------------------------------> > Free

Jyotish lessons (MP3):> http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > Free Jyotish

software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > Sri Jagannath Centre

(SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> >>

-------------------------------> > > > >

Archives: vedic astrology> > Group info:>

vedic astrology/info.html> > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to> vedic astrology-> > ....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......> > || Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri Krishnaarpanamastu

|| > > > ________________________________> > > Visit your

group "vedic astrology" on the web.> > To from this group, send

an email to:> vedic astrology> > Your use of

is subject to the >

________________________________>Archives:

vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha ji

 

Raw need not be the first attempt,but can be an initial or elementary

understanding.Some one might have made similar attempts in the past.

Others might be following such or making fresh attempts.Thus we have

to first verify, the validity of such attempts,when not sanctioned by

authorities.

 

I have raised numerous concerns in the past,all pointing towards

misfit/discrepencies between parasharas work as a whole and bhavas in

vargas.

As we do not find exclusive refrences,the only possibility available

for us is to try and fit our theory somewhere into parasharas works.

Neither it was possible for me nor got any response from others for

the concerns.

 

 

respect

Pradeep

 

 

vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao"

<pvr@c...> wrote:

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> You went on ad naseum without addressing my main point.

>

> You yourself acknowledged that Dr Raman used houses in navamsa. What

then makes you say that taking houses in navamsa is "raw or first

level attempt" and "trial"? If you call it "suspicious" or

"questionable", I can respect your view. But the words you used imply

that this is some kind of new practice, which it is not.

>

> I am not interested in an argument with you on the relative

importance of rasi and navamsa. That is a different argument. My point

now is very specific. How can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw

or first level attempt" and "trial" after so many decades (if not

centuries) of that practice by learned Jyotishis such as Dr Raman?

And, who are you make that judgment and use such strong words?

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

>

> > Dear Narasimha ji Namaste

> >

> > It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal

bias.

> > When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even before

> > the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav

> > ''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one

> > needs to be skeptical about the traditional part.

> >

> > Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of navamshas as a chart similar

> > to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even profession was seen from 10th

> > house in navamsha.

> > Now suppose if i use them for my spouse(combining parasharas advise

> > with your advise(usage of houses)) - are'nt we going to see the same

> > results for me and my spouse.Thus i request, not to feel offended by

> > my comments.

> >

> > If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

> > spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

> > Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.

> > As Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi

> > chakra, before making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''

> > only as a secondary source,it has not made any negative impacts on his

> > works/predictions.

> >

> > Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may have to

> > point your attention towards the weakness,as well.

> > But if you feel you are doing justice to your conscience after reading

> > all the materials,it is completely alright.

> > As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards

> > perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual discretions

> > and mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.

> >

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

> > vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

> > > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years have

> > > done

> > > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

> > >

> > > Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have

> > > used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works, they

DID

> > > use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

> > > known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

> > >

> > > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > > tradition.

> > >

> > > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

> > > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

> > > offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

> > > promote your personal biases.

> > >

> > > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in

> > > Rashi

> > > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

> > > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

> > > traditional

> > > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

> > > contemporary

> > > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > > truth.

> > >

> > > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your point

> > > home, you made a choice!

> > >

> > > Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

> > > divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart,

some

> > > are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example, Narayana

> > > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet owning

the

> > > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from father,

> > > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

> > > see the events happening to father.

> > >

> > > Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house

lords of

> > > rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing the

> > > start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

> > > start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

> > > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of rasi

> > > chart determine the starting position.

> > >

> > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > > Narasimha

> > > -------------------------------

> > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > > -------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Dear Panditji

 

Thanks again for your words of encouragement.Your opinion regarding

other fundamental topics do explain your knowledge.Thus these words

are giving me further confidence.

 

respect

Pradeep

 

 

vedic astrology, Panditji <navagraha@g...> wrote:

> Namaste Vijaydas,

>

> Again a very nicely written post. I agree with your viewpoints and I

> went back and looked for references where sage has mentioned bhavas in

> amshas. Everyplace he talks about bhavas he seems to be referring to

> the main rashi kundali.

>

> Narasimha,

>

> I think the point being made here is where is the Pararashar's saction

> of using bhavas in amshas. The point is not whether Raman used them or

> KNRao used them. What Vijaydas is asking is where is the reference in

> the classics. You have mentioned many times that Parashar is the

> greatest authority on jyotish so lets use his work in BPHS as the

> reference.

>

> I had mentioned about one Mr V.D. Bhat one of the most celebrated

> jyotishi of the past 25 years in western Maharashtra. he has a track

> record of fantanstic prediction in natal horoscopy. He is a legend. He

> uses Uranus and Neptune and his books, all in marathi, are full of

> references to uranus and neptune. He uses even dashas sparingly. He

> has developed a jyotish drishti for these combinations. Mr. Gogate of

> this list is familiar with his works. Now that is his method but it

> has NO classical standing. Parashar did not mention uranus or neptune.

> So if someone from his school starts using these outer planets ( BTW,

> all of his students use them) and are making accurate predictions in

> high percentage of cases all power to them. But again there is no

> classical reference to it.

>

> The question Vijaydas has been asking is where is the classical

> reference to using amshas as houses ? You have mentioned that SJC did

> not invent these divisional charts. I am glad that you said that

> because anyone who has questioned the use of them has been grouped

> into someone who is against SJC.So much so that some beleive it as a

> SJC tradition.

>

> Also many just say that what is not seen in the rashi chart won't be

> given by divioans/divisioanl charts. But how many actually practice it

> that way. My question is why not go only to rashi chart to see what is

> promised by rashi chart. If it can not be seen in rashi chart, how can

> it be seen in divisions ( except for the strength of the graha). To

> say that there are many significations for the houses and one has to

> go to the divisionals to see the real picture is inexperience of not

> seeing the thing in rashi chart. The jyotishi I mentioned does not

> have to go to divisionals to see things clearly. he has many subtle

> reference points, like for spouse, just by seeing shukra in simha he

> has drawn a few conclusions, then the seventh lord..etc. etc. If we

> spend our time to deeply understand the rashi chart from a couple of

> reference points and master that, it is enough to answer most of the

> questions people have.

>

> Yes, that leaves the question of twins, that has been brought up

> everytime this discussion is going on. I have not seen much evidence

> that divisional charts can conclusively predict for twins. It is not a

> proven fact nor a forgone conclusion. From a practical standpoint the

> number of people who are twins is so miniscule that it is but an

> academic excercise for me. Maybe its a good research topic unless

> someone is claming to have solved that riddle.

>

> with respects

>

> ...

>

> On 7/13/05, vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > Dear Narasimha ji Namaste

> >

> > It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal

bias.

> > When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even before

> > the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav

> > ''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one

> > needs to be skeptical about the traditional part.

> >

> > Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of navamshas as a chart similar

> > to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even profession was seen from 10th

> > house in navamsha.

> > Now suppose if i use them for my spouse(combining parasharas advise

> > with your advise(usage of houses)) - are'nt we going to see the same

> > results for me and my spouse.Thus i request, not to feel offended by

> > my comments.

> >

> > If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

> > spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

> > Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.

> > As Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi

> > chakra, before making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''

> > only as a secondary source,it has not made any negative impacts on his

> > works/predictions.

> >

> > Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may have to

> > point your attention towards the weakness,as well.

> > But if you feel you are doing justice to your conscience after reading

> > all the materials,it is completely alright.

> > As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards

> > perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual discretions

> > and mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.

> >

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

> > > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years have

> > > done

> > > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

> > >

> > > Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not have

> > > used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works, they

DID

> > > use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

> > > known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

> > >

> > > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > > tradition.

> > >

> > > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

> > > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

> > > offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

> > > promote your personal biases.

> > >

> > > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in

> > > Rashi

> > > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

> > > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

> > > traditional

> > > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

> > > contemporary

> > > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > > truth.

> > >

> > > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your point

> > > home, you made a choice!

> > >

> > > Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

> > > divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart,

some

> > > are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example, Narayana

> > > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet owning

the

> > > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from father,

> > > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is used to

> > > see the events happening to father.

> > >

> > > Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house

lords of

> > > rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing the

> > > start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

> > > start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

> > > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of rasi

> > > chart determine the starting position.

> > >

> > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > > Narasimha

> > >

> > -------------------------------

> > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3):

> > http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > >

> > -------------------------------

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Group info:

> > vedic astrology/info.html

> >

> > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to

> > vedic astrology-

> >

> > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ________________________________

> >

> >

> > Visit your group "vedic astrology" on the web.

> >

> >

> > vedic astrology

> >

> >

> > ________________________________

> >

[Guest guest]

Dear Sweeji

 

Thanks for the mail.Are we referring to houses in the said amshas or

in rashi.Shri Narasimha may help.

 

Regds

Pradeep

 

 

vedic astrology, "Swee Chan" <swee@c...> wrote:

> Jaya Jagannatha

>

> Dear Vijaydas and Panditji,

> Namaste

>

> FYI below from Narada Samhita. References are made to amshas as well:

>

> Namaste Vijaydas,

>

> Again a very nicely written post. I agree with your viewpoints and I

went back and looked for references where sage has mentioned bhavas in

amshas. Everyplace he talks about bhavas he seems to be referring to

the main rashi kundali.

>

> हारेशरà¥à¤•à¥à¤·à¤¦à¤²à¤¸à¥à¤¥à¥ˆà¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥

दृषà¥à¤Ÿà¥‹ यà¥à¤•à¥à¤¤à¤ƒ शशी शà¥à¤­à¤ƒà¥¤

> तà¥à¤°à¥à¤¯à¤‚शे

ततà¥à¤ªà¤¤à¤¿à¤®à¤¿à¤¤à¥à¤°à¤°à¥à¤•à¥à¤·à¤—तेरà¥à¤¯à¥à¤•à¥à¤¤à¥\

‡à¤•à¥à¤·à¤¿à¤¤à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¤¥à¤¾à¥¥à¥«à¥«à¥¤à¥¨à¥©à¥¬

>

> दà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¦à¤¶à¤¾à¤‚शे फलं पà¥à¤°à¥‹à¤•à¥à¤¤à¤‚

नवांशे पà¥à¤¯à¤¥ कीरà¥à¤¤à¥à¤¯à¤¤à¥‡à¥¤

> आरकà¥à¤·à¥‡à¤•à¥‹

वधरà¥à¤šà¤¿à¤°à¥à¤¨à¤¿à¤¯à¥à¤¦à¥à¤§à¤•à¥à¤¶à¤²à¥‹à¤°à¥à¤¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¨à¥\

॥५५।२३७

>

> hÄreÅ›arká¹£adalasthaistu dṛṣṭo yuktaḥ Å›aśī Å›ubhaḥ|

> tryaá¹Å›e tatpatimitrarká¹£agateryukteká¹£itastathÄ||55|236

>

> dvÄdaÅ›Äá¹Å›e phalaá¹ proktaá¹ navÄá¹Å›e pyatha kÄ«rtyate|

> Äraká¹£eko vadharucirniyuddhakuÅ›alorthavÄn||55|237

>

>

> Love,

> Swee

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha ji

 

You have not given attention to my question regarding navamsha.

 

Assume navamsha is analysed similar to Rashi - ie first check tenth in

rashi then 10th in navamsha,first check 5th in rashi and then 5th in

navamsha - for the same individual as Dr.Raman has done.No disrespect

towards great shri Raman,whose book was the first one i had purchased

in astrology.I can express my concerns even if i am not anyone.

 

Now let us combine parasharas advise(nav amsha is for spouse) with

your advise(houses) and use my navamsha to see my spouse.

 

Are not we seeing the same result for any pair of husband and wife.

 

I am pretty sure that you have to agree with me regarding the

discrepancy here.

 

Regds

Pradeep

 

 

-- In vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> Dear Narasimha ji

>

> Raw need not be the first attempt,but can be an initial or elementary

> understanding.Some one might have made similar attempts in the past.

> Others might be following such or making fresh attempts.Thus we have

> to first verify, the validity of such attempts,when not sanctioned by

> authorities.

>

> I have raised numerous concerns in the past,all pointing towards

> misfit/discrepencies between parasharas work as a whole and bhavas in

> vargas.

> As we do not find exclusive refrences,the only possibility available

> for us is to try and fit our theory somewhere into parasharas works.

> Neither it was possible for me nor got any response from others for

> the concerns.

>

>

> respect

> Pradeep

>

>

> vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao"

> <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > You went on ad naseum without addressing my main point.

> >

> > You yourself acknowledged that Dr Raman used houses in navamsa. What

> then makes you say that taking houses in navamsa is "raw or first

> level attempt" and "trial"? If you call it "suspicious" or

> "questionable", I can respect your view. But the words you used imply

> that this is some kind of new practice, which it is not.

> >

> > I am not interested in an argument with you on the relative

> importance of rasi and navamsa. That is a different argument. My point

> now is very specific. How can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw

> or first level attempt" and "trial" after so many decades (if not

> centuries) of that practice by learned Jyotishis such as Dr Raman?

> And, who are you make that judgment and use such strong words?

> >

> > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > Narasimha

> > -------------------------------

> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > -------------------------------

> >

> > > Dear Narasimha ji Namaste

> > >

> > > It is not at all an extreme position or promotion of any personal

> bias.

> > > When we talk of age old tradition,we can travel backwards ,even

before

> > > the times of Dr.Raman.Such scholars(published works) did use nav

> > > ''amsha'' of various bhava nathas and lagna, but no houses.Thus one

> > > needs to be skeptical about the traditional part.

> > >

> > > Dr.Raman, if we note, had used group of navamshas as a chart similar

> > > to Rashi chakra(ie for all matters).Even profession was seen

from 10th

> > > house in navamsha.

> > > Now suppose if i use them for my spouse(combining parasharas advise

> > > with your advise(usage of houses)) - are'nt we going to see the same

> > > results for me and my spouse.Thus i request, not to feel offended by

> > > my comments.

> > >

> > > If we read classics,we can find navamsha being considered (not

> > > spouses)before arriving at results for bhava lords.

> > > Thus Dr.Raman giving importance to navamsha is understandable.

> > > As Dr.Raman had first evaluated all the necessary from the rashi

> > > chakra, before making a prediction, and had used navamsha ''chakra''

> > > only as a secondary source,it has not made any negative impacts

on his

> > > works/predictions.

> > >

> > > Thus if you want to support the usage based on tradition,i may

have to

> > > point your attention towards the weakness,as well.

> > > But if you feel you are doing justice to your conscience after

reading

> > > all the materials,it is completely alright.

> > > As i am not expecting a conclusive acceptance,let us strive towards

> > > perfecting our knowledge,thorugh application of individual

discretions

> > > and mutual sharing.For me it is impossile to imagine houses.

> > >

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > > I am not the first person expressing concerns over treatment of

> > > > > divisionals as charts.Many learned scholars of yester years

have

> > > > done

> > > > > so.Thus it is worth giving a thought.

> > > >

> > > > Not many, only some. While scholars like Dr B.V. Raman may not

have

> > > > used dasamsa etc heavily in their publicly available works, they

> DID

> > > > use navamsa and did use houses in it. In fact, most of the well-

> > > > known scholars I know did use houses in navamsa.

> > > >

> > > > Thus, your position is an extreme one and against an age old

> > > > tradition.

> > > >

> > > > Your extreme position is not what offends me. It is your use of

> > > > expressions like "raw or first level attempt" and "trial" that

> > > > offends me. You are mis-characterizing an age old tradition to

> > > > promote your personal biases.

> > > >

> > > > > Now coming to the topic.You may also try to think,why Bhava in

> > > > Rashi

> > > > > chakra initiates the Narayana Dasha(from the parampara you have

> > > > > mentioned) for a divisional matter.Thus i may assume that

> > > > traditional

> > > > > knowledge got diluted a bit as part of experimentation,by

> > > > contemporary

> > > > > jyotishis.This as i said may have been an attempt to know the

> > > > truth.

> > > >

> > > > If you want to use Narayana dasa as an example to drive your

point

> > > > home, you made a choice!

> > > >

> > > > Narayana dasa has umpteen variations. While some variations of

> > > > divisional Narayana dasa are based on the houses in rasi chart,

> some

> > > > are based on houses in divisions themselves. For example,

Narayana

> > > > dasa started from the sign occupied in D-12 by the planet owning

> the

> > > > 9th house in rasi chart shows the guidance one gets from father,

> > > > Narayana dasa started from the 9th house of D-12 itself is

used to

> > > > see the events happening to father.

> > > >

> > > > Even when we find a divisional Narayana dasa based on house

> lords of

> > > > rasi chart, we do use houses in division. For example, seeing the

> > > > start sign and "7th house" from it, seeing the "9th house" from

> > > > start sign etc are all done in the divisional chart. Houses in

> > > > divisional chart are implicitly assumed even though houses of

rasi

> > > > chart determine the starting position.

> > > >

> > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > > > Narasimha

> > > > -------------------------------

> > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > > > -------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Namaste Pradeep,

 

> > How can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw> > or first level attempt"

and "trial" after so many decades (if not> > centuries) of that practice by

learned Jyotishis such as Dr Raman?

>

> Raw need not be the first attempt,but can be an initial or elementary>

understanding.Some one might have made similar attempts in the past.> Others

might be following such or making fresh attempts.Thus we have

> to first verify, the validity of such attempts,when not sanctioned by> authorities.

 

Who is the "authority" here? You???????

 

As far as higher authorities such as Parasara are concerned, they did not

*unambiguously* state either view point. One can read them and draw conclusions

either way based on one's inclination. (I'll write more on this later in the

mail.)

 

As far as modern authorities are concerned, Dr Raman, Sri KN Rao, Pt Sanjay Rath

all used houses in navamsa.

 

Many generations of excellent Jyotishis used houses in navamsa. My father, his

grandfather, Dr Raman, his grandfather, my guru Pt Sanjay Rath and his

grandfather all used houses in navamsa. In fact, countless authors used houses

in navamsa.

 

Given that this view has been accepted by a lot of astrologers for a long time,

I fail to see who you are to come and label the use of houses in navamsa as a

"raw or first level attempt" and a "trial". It is quite rash and arrogant to

dismiss the works and efforts of so many with such dismissive words.

> I have raised numerous concerns in the past,all pointing towards>

misfit/discrepencies between parasharas work as a whole and bhavas in> vargas.>

As we do not find exclusive refrences,the only possibility available> for us is

to try and fit our theory somewhere into parasharas works.> Neither it was

possible for me nor got any response from others for> the concerns.

 

I never understood your concerns.

 

BTW, Parasara mentioned a special raja yoga in BPHS. He said that THE SAME

PLANET ASPECTING LAGNA in six divisional charts (of the shadvarga) gives a raja

yoga.

 

If navamsa is not a "chakra" with houses etc as you say, what is the purpose of

seeing aspects on lagna in navamsa?

 

Though Parasara did not explicitly mention houses in vargas, there are

statements such as this which indicate that navamsa is a chart with houses etc.

In fact, Parasara did explcitly talk about the 12th house from atma karaka's

navamsa. Though some people insist that the sign must be transposed into the

rasi chart, Parasara did not explicitly say so. By the principle of simpler

hypothesis, I conclude that Parasara talked of the 12th house from AK in

navamsa itself.

 

Bottomline is that there are enough indications in BPHS about houses in navamsa,

but nothing "absolutely unambiguous" and concrete.

 

Given that there is nothing concrete, we maintain a healthy respect for your

views. On the contrary, you are being rash and brash enough to dismiss the

works of many scholars as "raw and first level attempt" and a "trial".

 

BTW, I could not read the verses sent by Swee Chan. She must have used some font

that I don't have in my PC. In general, it will be nice if people don't assume

that everybody has the fonts they have and try to translitarate things in the

simple Roman script.

 

> Assume navamsha is analysed similar to Rashi - ie first check tenth in> rashi

then 10th in navamsha,first check 5th in rashi and then 5th in> navamsha - for

the same individual as Dr.Raman has done.No disrespect> towards great shri

Raman,whose book was the first one i had purchased> in astrology.I can express

my concerns even if i am not anyone.

 

Expressing concerns is one thing and rudely pronouncing something a savant did

as a "raw and first level attempt" and a "trial" is quite another.

 

> Now let us combine parasharas advise(nav amsha is for spouse) with> your

advise(houses) and use my navamsha to see my spouse.> > Are not we seeing the

same result for any pair of husband and wife.> > I am pretty sure that you have

to agree with me regarding the> discrepancy here.

First of all, do YOU see the same result for any pair of husband and wife by

using JUST the RASI chart? Taking the 7th house from lagna or Moon or Venus (or

whatever you do to see wife in rasi chart) in rasi chart as lagna, can you find

a match with the chart of the spouse? If your approach is not any better, don't

complain about my approach.

 

Second of all, one's navamsa is not meant to be the rasi chart of spouse (though

there are often links). One's navamsa shows how one's marriage will be, how

one's relationship with spouse will be and how the native and spouse follow

dharma.

 

Your so-called "discrepancy" stems from your mistaken idea of what navamsa is supposed to be.

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

-------------------------------Free Jyotish

lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.netFree Jyotish software

(Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website:

http://www.SriJagannath.org-------------------------------

> respect> Pradeep> > vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R.

Rao"> <pvr@c...> wrote:> > Namaste Pradeep,> > > > You went on ad naseum

without addressing my main point.> > > > You yourself acknowledged that Dr

Raman used houses in navamsa. What> then makes you say that taking houses in

navamsa is "raw or first> level attempt" and "trial"? If you call it

"suspicious" or> "questionable", I can respect your view. But the words you

used imply> that this is some kind of new practice, which it is not.> > > > I

am not interested in an argument with you on the relative> importance of rasi

and navamsa. That is a different argument. My point> now is very specific. How

can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw> or first level attempt" and

"trial" after so many decades (if not> centuries) of that practice by learned

Jyotishis such as Dr Raman?> And, who are you make that judgment and use such

strong words?> > > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,> > Narasimha

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha ji

 

Though we consider works from other sages,as far as i know,Parashara

muni and his works are accepeted by majority as a standard guideline.

Then i have already mentioned that scholars prior to the ones you have

said,did not use houses in navamsha though they used navamsha.

For example if lagna lord has a navamsha of 9th lord,then they

referred to it as bhagya navamsha.

Also we need not not assume that only the well known and the ones who

have got their works pulished as having tradition and knowledge.

There were many who did not use houses as it is not possile.Thus i did

not make any blunt view and there is no need for you to get frustrated.

 

Regarding your shloka w.r to Raja yoga- Late Shri Santhanam had

already expressed his concern.

He said he cannot imagine aspects in vargas,and is a first step

towards my point.Late Shri Subbu Rao also had expressed concerns over

using bhavas.

Also the shloka, as you had explained in the past, is - the same

planet ''joining'' or aspecting shadvargas of Lagna(i think it is not

divisional ''charts'').

Thus i will say ,for example if shukra is the planet ,then shukra has

to aspect or be placed in the six vargas of Lagna.

Thus if shukra is aspecting or placed in the kshethra of lagna

((aspects(graha) emanate by longitudinal degress according to

parashara)) and is occupying the other 5 vargas ,then there is no

ambiguity.

We derive navamsha from position in rashi chakra,but while analysis we

want to take them to a different plane!!!!

 

Aspects on navamsha of lagna - is to see the root sign containing

lagna navamsha and seeing the aspects there.

Aspects on Karakamsha lagna too is similar.Thus 12th from karakamsha

has to be seen from rashi chakra for the same reason.

Rule for aspects given by sage is clear and can happen only in rashi

chakra.

In vargas we are arranging the signs and they are not as in real

order.Planets position in the heaven cannot be changed.

When we see navamsha we are again looking at the same position,but

from a closer angle.It is not difficult to understand this.

 

If you have not understood my concerns written in the past,i have no

more knowledge to convey.

 

Respect

Pradeep

 

 

 

vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao"

<pvr@c...> wrote:

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> > > How can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw

> > > or first level attempt" and "trial" after so many decades (if not

> > > centuries) of that practice by learned Jyotishis such as Dr Raman?

> >

> > Raw need not be the first attempt,but can be an initial or elementary

> > understanding.Some one might have made similar attempts in the past.

> > Others might be following such or making fresh attempts.Thus we have

> > to first verify, the validity of such attempts,when not sanctioned by

> > authorities.

>

> Who is the "authority" here? You???????

>

> As far as higher authorities such as Parasara are concerned, they

did not *unambiguously* state either view point. One can read them and

draw conclusions either way based on one's inclination. (I'll write

more on this later in the mail.)

>

> As far as modern authorities are concerned, Dr Raman, Sri KN Rao, Pt

Sanjay Rath all used houses in navamsa.

>

> Many generations of excellent Jyotishis used houses in navamsa. My

father, his grandfather, Dr Raman, his grandfather, my guru Pt Sanjay

Rath and his grandfather all used houses in navamsa. In fact,

countless authors used houses in navamsa.

>

> Given that this view has been accepted by a lot of astrologers for a

long time, I fail to see who you are to come and label the use of

houses in navamsa as a "raw or first level attempt" and a "trial". It

is quite rash and arrogant to dismiss the works and efforts of so many

with such dismissive words.

>

> > I have raised numerous concerns in the past,all pointing towards

> > misfit/discrepencies between parasharas work as a whole and bhavas in

> > vargas.

> > As we do not find exclusive refrences,the only possibility available

> > for us is to try and fit our theory somewhere into parasharas works.

> > Neither it was possible for me nor got any response from others for

> > the concerns.

>

> I never understood your concerns.

>

> BTW, Parasara mentioned a special raja yoga in BPHS. He said that

THE SAME PLANET ASPECTING LAGNA in six divisional charts (of the

shadvarga) gives a raja yoga.

>

> If navamsa is not a "chakra" with houses etc as you say, what is the

purpose of seeing aspects on lagna in navamsa?

>

> Though Parasara did not explicitly mention houses in vargas, there

are statements such as this which indicate that navamsa is a chart

with houses etc. In fact, Parasara did explcitly talk about the 12th

house from atma karaka's navamsa. Though some people insist that the

sign must be transposed into the rasi chart, Parasara did not

explicitly say so. By the principle of simpler hypothesis, I conclude

that Parasara talked of the 12th house from AK in navamsa itself.

>

> Bottomline is that there are enough indications in BPHS about houses

in navamsa, but nothing "absolutely unambiguous" and concrete.

>

> Given that there is nothing concrete, we maintain a healthy respect

for your views. On the contrary, you are being rash and brash enough

to dismiss the works of many scholars as "raw and first level attempt"

and a "trial".

>

> BTW, I could not read the verses sent by Swee Chan. She must have

used some font that I don't have in my PC. In general, it will be nice

if people don't assume that everybody has the fonts they have and try

to translitarate things in the simple Roman script.

>

> > Assume navamsha is analysed similar to Rashi - ie first check tenth in

> > rashi then 10th in navamsha,first check 5th in rashi and then 5th in

> > navamsha - for the same individual as Dr.Raman has done.No disrespect

> > towards great shri Raman,whose book was the first one i had purchased

> > in astrology.I can express my concerns even if i am not anyone.

>

> Expressing concerns is one thing and rudely pronouncing something a

savant did as a "raw and first level attempt" and a "trial" is quite

another.

>

> > Now let us combine parasharas advise(nav amsha is for spouse) with

> > your advise(houses) and use my navamsha to see my spouse.

> >

> > Are not we seeing the same result for any pair of husband and wife.

> >

> > I am pretty sure that you have to agree with me regarding the

> > discrepancy here.

>

> First of all, do YOU see the same result for any pair of husband and

wife by using JUST the RASI chart? Taking the 7th house from lagna or

Moon or Venus (or whatever you do to see wife in rasi chart) in rasi

chart as lagna, can you find a match with the chart of the spouse? If

your approach is not any better, don't complain about my approach.

>

> Second of all, one's navamsa is not meant to be the rasi chart of

spouse (though there are often links). One's navamsa shows how one's

marriage will be, how one's relationship with spouse will be and how

the native and spouse follow dharma.

>

> Your so-called "discrepancy" stems from your mistaken idea of what

navamsa is supposed to be.

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

>

> > respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> > vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao"

> > <pvr@c...> wrote:

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > You went on ad naseum without addressing my main point.

> > >

> > > You yourself acknowledged that Dr Raman used houses in navamsa. What

> > then makes you say that taking houses in navamsa is "raw or first

> > level attempt" and "trial"? If you call it "suspicious" or

> > "questionable", I can respect your view. But the words you used imply

> > that this is some kind of new practice, which it is not.

> > >

> > > I am not interested in an argument with you on the relative

> > importance of rasi and navamsa. That is a different argument. My point

> > now is very specific. How can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw

> > or first level attempt" and "trial" after so many decades (if not

> > centuries) of that practice by learned Jyotishis such as Dr Raman?

> > And, who are you make that judgment and use such strong words?

> > >

> > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> > > Narasimha

[Guest guest]

Namaste!

 

I am interfering in the discussions only for once to convey some 'facts' which

may not be in your knowledge.

 

To Vijaydas :- your opinion is that It is impossible for you to consider Houses

& Aspects in Varga Charts and you can not research on the very basis which

seems to be illogical to you and some other scholars have expressed concerns on

that in Past. you also say that it is a first level or Raw attempt which can

easily mean that the usage of concept has just now started and needs to be

tested further for its worth.

 

Shri Narsimha has said that The concept has been used by many astrologer & that

too for generations.

 

from the few months of interactions, i have developed an idea that you prefer

Shri K.N.Raoji's methods much more than others. (this is my opinion and if it

is not proper then i take back my words & aplologise for that).

 

I wish to quote here that I have eveidence that Shri K.N.Rao uses Varga charts,

it's bhavas & aspects as well. it is well known that Dr. Raman & Shri Rao both

used Navamansha charts, it's Houses & Aspects.

 

I 'll just provide one Article written by him. it was published in one hindi

monthly jyotish magazine of Sept 2000.

 

In This article , while discussing, Saptamsha Chart (D7), He analyses Thus :

"LET US NOW SEE THE SAPTAMSHA CHART OF THE NATIVE. IN D7, 5TH HOUSE HAS EXALTED

MARS WITH SATURN & MOON AND IT IS ASPECTED BY GURU & SHUKRA FROM 11TH HOUSE"

 

The above para in itself is sufficient evidence, besides there are many. I his

own magazine, the articles are published by his research team, which freely

discusses House & Aspeects in Varga charts.

 

Hence it is clear that revereed all noted, famous & not so famous luminaries of

Vedic Jyotisha such as Shri Suryanarayan Rao, Dr Raman, Shri K.N.Rao, Shri

Chalapati Rao,Shri Sanjay Rath and many more supports VARGA CHARTS &

HOUSES/ASPECTS concepts.

 

The fact that SJC also has a long tradition which is traced to the time of

Chaitnya Mahaprabhu. Dr Raman must have got the concept from his grandfather

first, KN Rao's Mother also must have used the concept. so it proves that it is

idea which has been tested for generations and hence automatically proves it's

worth.

 

Regarding Classics references, i would like to assume that all the work of

Parashara, Kalyan varma, and other sages works may not be available to us in it

Full & Purest from. hence there is always scope for research and that is why

BVB, SJC & other individual scholars indulge in to periodic researches. best

example is KP Astrology.

 

that is why i admire Narsimha Rao for his s/w, where in he has given opprtuntity

for reasearch in Ayanamsha, Dasha Years, etc... every individual can have their

own set of data and can use it.

 

In my opinon, Vedic Jyotisha is such a vast & democratic field that it has a

space for everybody.this a unique feature which is not available in other

subjects/Sciences. if one feel that some concept doesn't work from him even it

is stated by none other than sages, he is perfectly free to ignore it in

his/her own analysis.

I think that any astrologer who does prediction in considerable quantity, and

gets the quality of accuracy about 65% more is a very good astrologer no matter

what method he is using.

 

I am sorry if my message was out of tune w.r.t your ongoing discussions.

 

astu,

 

Astrologically yours,

 

Utpal Pathakvijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep > wrote:

Dear Narasimha jiThough we consider works from other sages,as far as i

know,Parasharamuni and his works are accepeted by majority as a standard

guideline.Then i have already mentioned that scholars prior to the ones you

havesaid,did not use houses in navamsha though they used navamsha.For example

if lagna lord has a navamsha of 9th lord,then theyreferred to it as bhagya

navamsha.Also we need not not assume that only the well known and the ones

whohave got their works pulished as having tradition and knowledge.There were

many who did not use houses as it is not possile.Thus i didnot make any blunt

view and there is no need for you to get frustrated.Regarding your shloka w.r

to Raja yoga- Late Shri Santhanam hadalready expressed his concern.He said he

cannot imagine aspects in vargas,and is a first steptowards my

point.Late Shri Subbu Rao also had expressed concerns overusing bhavas.Also the

shloka, as you had explained in the past, is - the sameplanet ''joining'' or

aspecting shadvargas of Lagna(i think it is notdivisional ''charts'').Thus i

will say ,for example if shukra is the planet ,then shukra hasto aspect or be

placed in the six vargas of Lagna. Thus if shukra is aspecting or placed in the

kshethra of lagna((aspects(graha) emanate by longitudinal degress according

toparashara)) and is occupying the other 5 vargas ,then there is noambiguity.We

derive navamsha from position in rashi chakra,but while analysis wewant to take

them to a different plane!!!!Aspects on navamsha of lagna - is to see the root

sign containinglagna navamsha and seeing the aspects there.Aspects on

Karakamsha lagna too is similar.Thus 12th from karakamshahas to be seen from

rashi chakra for the same reason.Rule for aspects given by sage

is clear and can happen only in rashichakra.In vargas we are arranging the signs

and they are not as in realorder.Planets position in the heaven cannot be

changed.When we see navamsha we are again looking at the same position,butfrom

a closer angle.It is not difficult to understand this.If you have not

understood my concerns written in the past,i have nomore knowledge to

convey.RespectPradeepvedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R.

Rao"<pvr@c...> wrote:> Namaste Pradeep,> > > > How can finding houses in

navamsa be called "raw> > > or first level attempt" and "trial" after so many

decades (if not> > > centuries) of that practice by learned Jyotishis such as

Dr Raman?> > > > Raw need not be the first attempt,but can be an initial or

elementary> > understanding.Some one might have made similar attempts in the

past.> > Others might be following such or making fresh attempts.Thus we have> >

to first verify, the validity of such attempts,when not sanctioned by> >

authorities.> > Who is the "authority" here? You???????> > As far as higher

authorities such as Parasara are concerned, theydid not *unambiguously* state

either view point. One can read them anddraw conclusions either way based on

one's inclination. (I'll writemore on this later in the mail.)> > As far as

modern authorities are concerned, Dr Raman, Sri KN Rao, PtSanjay Rath all used

houses in navamsa.> > Many generations of excellent Jyotishis used houses in

navamsa. Myfather, his grandfather, Dr Raman, his grandfather, my guru Pt

SanjayRath and his grandfather all used houses in navamsa. In fact,countless

authors used houses in navamsa.> > Given that this view has been

accepted by a lot of astrologers for along time, I fail to see who you are to

come and label the use ofhouses in navamsa as a "raw or first level attempt"

and a "trial". Itis quite rash and arrogant to dismiss the works and efforts of

so manywith such dismissive words.> > > I have raised numerous concerns in the

past,all pointing towards> > misfit/discrepencies between parasharas work as a

whole and bhavas in> > vargas.> > As we do not find exclusive refrences,the

only possibility available> > for us is to try and fit our theory somewhere

into parasharas works.> > Neither it was possible for me nor got any response

from others for> > the concerns.> > I never understood your concerns.> > BTW,

Parasara mentioned a special raja yoga in BPHS. He said thatTHE SAME PLANET

ASPECTING LAGNA in six divisional charts (of theshadvarga) gives a raja

yoga.> > If navamsa is not a "chakra" with houses etc as you say, what is

thepurpose of seeing aspects on lagna in navamsa?> > Though Parasara did not

explicitly mention houses in vargas, thereare statements such as this which

indicate that navamsa is a chartwith houses etc. In fact, Parasara did

explcitly talk about the 12thhouse from atma karaka's navamsa. Though some

people insist that thesign must be transposed into the rasi chart, Parasara did

notexplicitly say so. By the principle of simpler hypothesis, I concludethat

Parasara talked of the 12th house from AK in navamsa itself.> > Bottomline is

that there are enough indications in BPHS about housesin navamsa, but nothing

"absolutely unambiguous" and concrete.> > Given that there is nothing

concrete, we maintain a healthy respectfor your views. On the contrary, you are

being rash and brash enoughto dismiss the

works of many scholars as "raw and first level attempt"and a "trial".> > BTW, I

could not read the verses sent by Swee Chan. She must haveused some font that I

don't have in my PC. In general, it will be niceif people don't assume that

everybody has the fonts they have and tryto translitarate things in the simple

Roman script.> > > Assume navamsha is analysed similar to Rashi - ie first

check tenth in> > rashi then 10th in navamsha,first check 5th in rashi and then

5th in> > navamsha - for the same individual as Dr.Raman has done.No

disrespect> > towards great shri Raman,whose book was the first one i had

purchased> > in astrology.I can express my concerns even if i am not anyone. >

> Expressing concerns is one thing and rudely pronouncing something asavant did

as a "raw and first level attempt" and a "trial" is quiteanother.> >

> Now let us combine parasharas advise(nav amsha is for spouse) with> > your

advise(houses) and use my navamsha to see my spouse.> > > > Are not we seeing

the same result for any pair of husband and wife.> > > > I am pretty sure that

you have to agree with me regarding the> > discrepancy here.> > First of all,

do YOU see the same result for any pair of husband andwife by using JUST the

RASI chart? Taking the 7th house from lagna orMoon or Venus (or whatever you do

to see wife in rasi chart) in rasichart as lagna, can you find a match with the

chart of the spouse? Ifyour approach is not any better, don't complain about my

approach.> > Second of all, one's navamsa is not meant to be the rasi chart

ofspouse (though there are often links). One's navamsa shows how one'smarriage

will be, how one's relationship with spouse will be and howthe native and

spouse

follow dharma.> > Your so-called "discrepancy" stems from your mistaken idea of

whatnavamsa is supposed to be.> > May Jupiter's light shine on us,> Narasimha>

-------------------------------> Free Jyotish

lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> Free Jyotish software

(Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website:

http://www.SriJagannath.org>

-------------------------------> > > respect>

> Pradeep> > > > vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao">

> <pvr@c...> wrote:> > > Namaste Pradeep,> > > > > > You went on ad naseum

without addressing my main point.> > > > > > You yourself acknowledged that Dr

Raman used houses in navamsa. What> > then makes you say that taking houses in

navamsa is "raw or first> > level attempt" and "trial"? If you call it

"suspicious" or> > "questionable", I can respect your view. But the words you

used imply> > that this is some kind of new practice, which it is not.> > > >

> > I am not interested in an argument with you on the relative> > importance

of rasi and navamsa. That is a different argument. My point> > now is very

specific. How can finding houses in navamsa be called "raw> > or first level

attempt" and "trial" after so many decades (if not> > centuries) of that

practice by learned Jyotishis such as Dr Raman?> > And, who are you make that

judgment and use such strong words?> > > > >

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,> > > NarasimhaArchives:

vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

 

Astrology chart

Vedic astrology

Dasa

Astrology horoscope

Astrology software

Start your day with - make it your home page

[Guest guest]

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">Jaya Jagannatha

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">Dear Narasimha,

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">Namaste

font-family:Arial">

font-family:Arial">[bTW, I could not read the verses sent by Swee Chan. She

must have used some font that I don't have in my PC. In general, it will be

nice if people don't assume that everybody has the fonts they have and try to

translitarate things in the simple Roman script.]

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">Below are the shlokas

in Roman script. References are made to the 7th and 8th Houses

for both male/female charts in Rashi or the Houses in

Vargas.

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">Thank you for your time.

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">Love,

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">Swee

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">

hAresharkSadalasthaistu dR^iSTo yuktaH shashI shubhaH|

tryaMshe tatpatimitrarkSagateryuktekSitastathA||55|236

mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:black">

dvAdashAMshe phalaM proktaM navAMshe pyatha kIrtyate|

ArakSeko

vadharucirniyuddhakushalorthavAn||55|237

12.0pt">

12.0pt">7th House

"Times New Roman"">lagnenduyuktaisriMshAMshaiH

phalametadvalAnugam|

"Times New Roman"">dR^iggaiH

mithoMshe shukrArkI shaukre cedvA ghaTAMshake||55.303

 

"Times New Roman"">strIbhiH

strI maithunaM yAti madanAnaladIpitA|

"Times New Roman"">shUnye

kApuruSo dyUne bale klIvo na sadR^ishi||55.304

 

8th House

"Times New Roman";mso-fareast-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">krUre

mso-fareast-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> 'STame 'STameshAMshe yasya syAttadvayaH same|

vaidhavyaM ca mR^itistasyâ svayaMsatsvarthageSu

tu||55.314

[Guest guest]

Namaste Pradeep,

 

> Regarding your shloka w.r to Raja yoga- Late Shri Santhanam had

> already expressed his concern.

> He said he cannot imagine aspects in vargas,and is a first step

> towards my point.Late Shri Subbu Rao also had expressed concerns

over

> using bhavas.

 

When I said that Dr. Raman, his grandfather, Sri KN Rao, Pt Sanjay

Rath, Pt Jagannath Rath and many other scholars used houses in

navamsa and you are unjustified in labeling it as a "raw or first

level attempt" and a "trial", you said you wanted something from

Parasara. You basically did not accept any of these scholars as

authorities and wanted a quote from Parasara.

 

I gave a quote. Now you don't want to accept the quote simply

because Sri Santhanam had a "concern" about it and had trouble

reconciling with it and Sri Subba Rao also had opposite views.

 

You wanted a quote and I gave one. Why is it suddenly important that

Sri Subba Rao and Sri Santhanam could not reconcile with that verse

and held different views? If their individual views are so

important, why not those of Dr Raman and many others mentioned by

him?

 

And, to remind you again, I am not asking you to even accept my

views. All I am asking is to acknowledge that you were hasty in

characterizing the use of houses in navamsa as a "raw or first level

attempt" and a "trial".

 

This is kind of like Krishna asking Kauravas on behalf of Pandavas,

after the return from exile, to give atleast 5 villages instead of

returning the kingdom! Still, you don't seem to realize that a few

scholars opining the other way does not reduce the view of so many

scholars to being "raw or first level attempt" and a "trial".

 

> Then i have already mentioned that scholars prior to the ones you

have

> said,did not use houses in navamsha though they used navamsha.

 

I don't agree. There were always people who used navamsa as a chakra

and some who didn't. Neither Dr Raman's grandfather nor Pt Rath's

grandfather invented the use of houses in navamsa and they

presumably learnt from their gurus.

 

> Thus i did not make any blunt view and

 

Of course, it is more than blunt to dismiss the works of respected

scholars as "raw or first level attempt" and a "trial".

 

> there is no need for you to get frustrated.

 

You have no way of knowing if I am frustrated or amused or whatever.

And, it does not matter to the discussion.

 

> 2)I am sorry to say that you have failed to see arrogant and

> sarcastic questions from shri Narasimha like ''Who are you'' -

''Are

> you the authority'' etc.Is that a bias from you.Did i say i am

some

> one or i am the authority.I used ''Raw'' as,other scholars prior

to

> the said scholars,have not used bhavas.Thus i too can express my

> strong views,

 

Well, you are not right that everybody before the great scholars I

mentioned did not use bhavas in navamsa. First you made it sound

like some of us suddenly started this recently. Now you are making

it sound like the grandfathers I mentioned started it.

 

Even assuming you are right, the use of houses in navamsa by

scholars for a century clearly makes it anything other than "raw or

first level attempt" and a "trial". If I asked you who you were to

dismiss the views of Dr Raman so decisively and negatively, I see no

arrogance in it. You are so strongly opinionated, so forcefully

dismissive of greats and so disrespecting of "sabhaa maryaadaa" that

you don't agree with and I am justified in asking who you are to

judge like that.

 

You, on the contrary, called me "frustrated". You called the views

of Dr Raman as "raw or first level attempts". Hmmm. I am tempted to

make some personal comments after seeing all this behavior, but let

me leave it here..

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

 

PS: This engagement with Pradeep seems to be nothing but a waste of

my time. I keep engaging with him only because he is a student of

Sri Chandrashekhar Sharma whom I respect. I'll be back to the TP

book and stay away from the list.

 

-------------------------------

Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

-------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha ji

 

You have tactically arrived at a conclusion that, i have called

Dr.Ramans attempt as Raw.

I had initially made this comment infact about those who have enhanced

and framed theories,forgetting the Rashi chakra and terming it as some

physical etc...i dont know what is it.

People keep on saying that,Rashi chakra is for some physical-inspite

of the fact that ,every aspect, can be seen from it.

 

Dr.Raman ,Shri.K.N.Raoji and all have always led the way for students

like us and have always seen the necessary from Rashi chakra.

Some others have done analysis,by totally disconnecting Rashi

chakra.So many students are being misguided,infact intelligent ones.

i as a student cannot appreciate this.There may be many who are trying

to please their Gurus.Pleasing Guru and Guru bhakthi are two different

things.

 

Your intention was to take me away from other vargas,trap me in

navamsha,so that you can get the advantage of well known scholars and

arrive at a conclusion as above.I feel you have succeeded in that.

 

There was no need to drag shri Chandrashekhar jis name here.I dont

think Chandrashekhar ji has requested you to debate with me.

 

I also understand that, as long as i do not subscrie to the views of a

particular school ,engaging with myslef is a waste of time for you.

I cannot make myslef useful for you through blind following.

 

Also it is better to make personal comments if you feel so, than

showing mercy.I am not here for any personal gain.

i find that some people are not interetsed in seeing facts,inspite of

hard work and sincerity.

 

But contrary to your view ,i do not find this as a waste of time.i am

pretty sure that atleast a few over here,have understood my

concerns.Thus my efforts are not in vain.

 

I feel i have tried to maintain ''sabhaa maryada''. if frustration was

too personal,i withdraw that word.

Though i have nothing to do with it,i feel the words you have chosen

to get Roman script from Swee Chan ji was not the best among polite.

 

Thanks & Regds

Pradeep

 

 

vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> > Regarding your shloka w.r to Raja yoga- Late Shri Santhanam had

> > already expressed his concern.

> > He said he cannot imagine aspects in vargas,and is a first step

> > towards my point.Late Shri Subbu Rao also had expressed concerns

> over

> > using bhavas.

>

> When I said that Dr. Raman, his grandfather, Sri KN Rao, Pt Sanjay

> Rath, Pt Jagannath Rath and many other scholars used houses in

> navamsa and you are unjustified in labeling it as a "raw or first

> level attempt" and a "trial", you said you wanted something from

> Parasara. You basically did not accept any of these scholars as

> authorities and wanted a quote from Parasara.

>

> I gave a quote. Now you don't want to accept the quote simply

> because Sri Santhanam had a "concern" about it and had trouble

> reconciling with it and Sri Subba Rao also had opposite views.

>

> You wanted a quote and I gave one. Why is it suddenly important that

> Sri Subba Rao and Sri Santhanam could not reconcile with that verse

> and held different views? If their individual views are so

> important, why not those of Dr Raman and many others mentioned by

> him?

>

> And, to remind you again, I am not asking you to even accept my

> views. All I am asking is to acknowledge that you were hasty in

> characterizing the use of houses in navamsa as a "raw or first level

> attempt" and a "trial".

>

> This is kind of like Krishna asking Kauravas on behalf of Pandavas,

> after the return from exile, to give atleast 5 villages instead of

> returning the kingdom! Still, you don't seem to realize that a few

> scholars opining the other way does not reduce the view of so many

> scholars to being "raw or first level attempt" and a "trial".

>

> > Then i have already mentioned that scholars prior to the ones you

> have

> > said,did not use houses in navamsha though they used navamsha.

>

> I don't agree. There were always people who used navamsa as a chakra

> and some who didn't. Neither Dr Raman's grandfather nor Pt Rath's

> grandfather invented the use of houses in navamsa and they

> presumably learnt from their gurus.

>

> > Thus i did not make any blunt view and

>

> Of course, it is more than blunt to dismiss the works of respected

> scholars as "raw or first level attempt" and a "trial".

>

> > there is no need for you to get frustrated.

>

> You have no way of knowing if I am frustrated or amused or whatever.

> And, it does not matter to the discussion.

>

> > 2)I am sorry to say that you have failed to see arrogant and

> > sarcastic questions from shri Narasimha like ''Who are you'' -

> ''Are

> > you the authority'' etc.Is that a bias from you.Did i say i am

> some

> > one or i am the authority.I used ''Raw'' as,other scholars prior

> to

> > the said scholars,have not used bhavas.Thus i too can express my

> > strong views,

>

> Well, you are not right that everybody before the great scholars I

> mentioned did not use bhavas in navamsa. First you made it sound

> like some of us suddenly started this recently. Now you are making

> it sound like the grandfathers I mentioned started it.

>

> Even assuming you are right, the use of houses in navamsa by

> scholars for a century clearly makes it anything other than "raw or

> first level attempt" and a "trial". If I asked you who you were to

> dismiss the views of Dr Raman so decisively and negatively, I see no

> arrogance in it. You are so strongly opinionated, so forcefully

> dismissive of greats and so disrespecting of "sabhaa maryaadaa" that

> you don't agree with and I am justified in asking who you are to

> judge like that.

>

> You, on the contrary, called me "frustrated". You called the views

> of Dr Raman as "raw or first level attempts". Hmmm. I am tempted to

> make some personal comments after seeing all this behavior, but let

> me leave it here..

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha

>

> PS: This engagement with Pradeep seems to be nothing but a waste of

> my time. I keep engaging with him only because he is a student of

> Sri Chandrashekhar Sharma whom I respect. I'll be back to the TP

> book and stay away from the list.

>

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------