Debate on divisional charts - Pradeep Vs Narasimha

[Guest guest]

||om paramagurave namah||

 

Dear Pradeep, namaste

 

Sorry to butt into this debate between you and Narasimha. A few

points:

 

(1) There are other quotes in BPHS that might indicate the use of

houses in vargas but Narasimha has cited a strong candidate. Of

course this is subject to the inductive logic that one uses when

reading BPHS. Do not ask me for these quotes as your questions

forced me to search for it...therefore in the same way you must find

them yourself.

 

(2) I agree with Narasimha that some of the words you used are not

conducive to a balanced and rational discussion. Even if you had not

intended that these words should convey the meaning as commonly

understood. For example, you used the word 'frustrated' in the below

email. Such words casting or reflective of a biased thinking should

not be there in any debate.

 

(3)Your arguments are something similar to Don Quixote with the

difference that you sit on your horse and argue that someone else

ought to charge at the windmills! This is totally against the

accepted norms of scholarly debate and the onus is on you to prove

your stand in the same way that Narasimha has done. I have been

following your emails from the beginning and there are very few

instances/examples to validate your thinking.

 

(4) The proof of pudding is in the timing of events as far as

Jyotisa is concerned. Using your approach, can you demonstrate that

it yields a more consistent and reproducible results when timing the

events? I have done some studies on siddhamsa and my experience is

that when treating the siddhamsa as a chart, it is very accurate as

far as the timing of events is concerned.

 

(5) Taking the siddhamsa as a specific example, can you please

explain how to analyse it using your approach? How to analyse the

siddhamsa vargas within the kshetra?

 

(6) I am fascinated by your illustration of the word 'kshetra'.

While acknowledging that it does refer to body, I am puzzled by your

rigid stand on this word...why is it that kshetra must refer to the

body only and not parts of the body? Why cant the heart be referred

to as kshetra when studying it as an independent unit? Ditto for the

liver, spleen etc. Your rigid stand on this word implies that the

equivalence of macro-cosmos = micro-cosmos or brahmanda = pindanda

is not valid here in the context of vargas. Or in other words, there

is no link between phenomena happening at the micro level scalable

to the macro-level.

 

best regards

Hari

 

PS: I changed the subject of this email string.

 

vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> 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

>

[Guest guest]

ear Hari

 

Thanks for your mail.

 

Point number 1 - if you share the shlokas,we can discuss.

 

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,though not a scholar,when supported by rational.Strong

concerns are only on certain points.''Who are you'' kind of

questions can only come out of frustration.If we do not have mutual

respect,no matter how learned we are ,how do we debate.Though

frustration is not a bad word,considering your advise i can be more

careful.

 

3)I go by, parashara,evident shlokas and works of scholars from

yesteryears and my own discretion.Proposers of new theory have to

give evidence.I can only give inconsistencies,which I have given in

multiples.So have Scholars.

 

4)We have seen shri Narsimha wonderfully explaining, Pope Ratzinger

(even Brahma lokamsha) with a wrong chart.Thus let us not talk about

proof and pudding.First verify possibilty,then analysis.Not

degrading the scholar in Narasimha,but pointing the pitfalls.

 

5)If i do not know something ,i wait and persevere.I do not want to

go for fast conclusions.Jyotish takes janmas to understand.We cannot

explain everything in jyotish by putting bhava,especially when not

sanctioned.

 

6)I never said Kshethra is for Body.Kshethra of a planet infact is

referring to a limb.All the kshethras together constitute body.Rashi

chakra and Bhavas together become the system.All the shlokas from

parashara refer to bhavas in rashi chakra.Vargas including Kshethra

refers to individual matters.

 

Regds

Pradeep

 

vedic astrology, "onlyhari"

<achyutagaddi@g...> wrote:

> ||om paramagurave namah||

>

> Dear Pradeep, namaste

>

> Sorry to butt into this debate between you and Narasimha. A few

> points:

>

> (1) There are other quotes in BPHS that might indicate the use of

> houses in vargas but Narasimha has cited a strong candidate. Of

> course this is subject to the inductive logic that one uses when

> reading BPHS. Do not ask me for these quotes as your questions

> forced me to search for it...therefore in the same way you must

find

> them yourself.

>

> (2) I agree with Narasimha that some of the words you used are not

> conducive to a balanced and rational discussion. Even if you had

not

> intended that these words should convey the meaning as commonly

> understood. For example, you used the word 'frustrated' in the

below

> email. Such words casting or reflective of a biased thinking

should

> not be there in any debate.

>

> (3)Your arguments are something similar to Don Quixote with the

> difference that you sit on your horse and argue that someone else

> ought to charge at the windmills! This is totally against the

> accepted norms of scholarly debate and the onus is on you to prove

> your stand in the same way that Narasimha has done. I have been

> following your emails from the beginning and there are very few

> instances/examples to validate your thinking.

>

> (4) The proof of pudding is in the timing of events as far as

> Jyotisa is concerned. Using your approach, can you demonstrate

that

> it yields a more consistent and reproducible results when timing

the

> events? I have done some studies on siddhamsa and my experience is

> that when treating the siddhamsa as a chart, it is very accurate

as

> far as the timing of events is concerned.

>

> (5) Taking the siddhamsa as a specific example, can you please

> explain how to analyse it using your approach? How to analyse the

> siddhamsa vargas within the kshetra?

>

> (6) I am fascinated by your illustration of the word 'kshetra'.

> While acknowledging that it does refer to body, I am puzzled by

your

> rigid stand on this word...why is it that kshetra must refer to

the

> body only and not parts of the body? Why cant the heart be

referred

> to as kshetra when studying it as an independent unit? Ditto for

the

> liver, spleen etc. Your rigid stand on this word implies that the

> equivalence of macro-cosmos = micro-cosmos or brahmanda = pindanda

> is not valid here in the context of vargas. Or in other words,

there

> is no link between phenomena happening at the micro level scalable

> to the macro-level.

>

> best regards

> Hari

>

> PS: I changed the subject of this email string.

>

> vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > 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

> >

[Guest guest]

||om brihaspataye namah||

 

Dear Pradeep,

 

Thanks for your reply. I have seen the other mails concerning this

debate and it is my judgement that this debate is inconsistent. I

just would like to respectfully state that I had no perceived bias

when writing point 2. If you felt otherwise, I am sorry for that.

 

regards

Hari

 

vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> ear Hari

>

> Thanks for your mail.

>

> Point number 1 - if you share the shlokas,we can discuss.

>

> 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,though not a scholar,when supported by

rational.Strong

> concerns are only on certain points.''Who are you'' kind of

> questions can only come out of frustration.If we do not have

mutual

> respect,no matter how learned we are ,how do we debate.Though

> frustration is not a bad word,considering your advise i can be

more

> careful.

>

> 3)I go by, parashara,evident shlokas and works of scholars from

> yesteryears and my own discretion.Proposers of new theory have to

> give evidence.I can only give inconsistencies,which I have given

in

> multiples.So have Scholars.

>

> 4)We have seen shri Narsimha wonderfully explaining, Pope

Ratzinger

> (even Brahma lokamsha) with a wrong chart.Thus let us not talk

about

> proof and pudding.First verify possibilty,then analysis.Not

> degrading the scholar in Narasimha,but pointing the pitfalls.

>

> 5)If i do not know something ,i wait and persevere.I do not want

to

> go for fast conclusions.Jyotish takes janmas to understand.We

cannot

> explain everything in jyotish by putting bhava,especially when not

> sanctioned.

>

> 6)I never said Kshethra is for Body.Kshethra of a planet infact is

> referring to a limb.All the kshethras together constitute

body.Rashi

> chakra and Bhavas together become the system.All the shlokas from

> parashara refer to bhavas in rashi chakra.Vargas including

Kshethra

> refers to individual matters.

>

> Regds

> Pradeep

>

> vedic astrology, "onlyhari"

> <achyutagaddi@g...> wrote:

> > ||om paramagurave namah||

> >

> > Dear Pradeep, namaste

> >

> > Sorry to butt into this debate between you and Narasimha. A few

> > points:

> >

> > (1) There are other quotes in BPHS that might indicate the use

of

> > houses in vargas but Narasimha has cited a strong candidate. Of

> > course this is subject to the inductive logic that one uses when

> > reading BPHS. Do not ask me for these quotes as your questions

> > forced me to search for it...therefore in the same way you must

> find

> > them yourself.

> >

> > (2) I agree with Narasimha that some of the words you used are

not

> > conducive to a balanced and rational discussion. Even if you had

> not

> > intended that these words should convey the meaning as commonly

> > understood. For example, you used the word 'frustrated' in the

> below

> > email. Such words casting or reflective of a biased thinking

> should

> > not be there in any debate.

> >

> > (3)Your arguments are something similar to Don Quixote with the

> > difference that you sit on your horse and argue that someone

else

> > ought to charge at the windmills! This is totally against the

> > accepted norms of scholarly debate and the onus is on you to

prove

> > your stand in the same way that Narasimha has done. I have been

> > following your emails from the beginning and there are very few

> > instances/examples to validate your thinking.

> >

> > (4) The proof of pudding is in the timing of events as far as

> > Jyotisa is concerned. Using your approach, can you demonstrate

> that

> > it yields a more consistent and reproducible results when timing

> the

> > events? I have done some studies on siddhamsa and my experience

is

> > that when treating the siddhamsa as a chart, it is very accurate

> as

> > far as the timing of events is concerned.

> >

> > (5) Taking the siddhamsa as a specific example, can you please

> > explain how to analyse it using your approach? How to analyse

the

> > siddhamsa vargas within the kshetra?

> >

> > (6) I am fascinated by your illustration of the word 'kshetra'.

> > While acknowledging that it does refer to body, I am puzzled by

> your

> > rigid stand on this word...why is it that kshetra must refer to

> the

> > body only and not parts of the body? Why cant the heart be

> referred

> > to as kshetra when studying it as an independent unit? Ditto for

> the

> > liver, spleen etc. Your rigid stand on this word implies that

the

> > equivalence of macro-cosmos = micro-cosmos or brahmanda =

pindanda

> > is not valid here in the context of vargas. Or in other words,

> there

> > is no link between phenomena happening at the micro level

scalable

> > to the macro-level.

> >

> > best regards

> > Hari

> >

> > PS: I changed the subject of this email string.

> >

> > vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > > 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

> > >

[Guest guest]

Dear Hari

 

Thanks for your kind mail.

Thanks again for all the guidance.

 

Regds

Pradeep

vedic astrology, "onlyhari" <achyutagaddi@g...>

wrote:

> ||om brihaspataye namah||

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> Thanks for your reply. I have seen the other mails concerning this

> debate and it is my judgement that this debate is inconsistent. I

> just would like to respectfully state that I had no perceived bias

> when writing point 2. If you felt otherwise, I am sorry for that.

>

> regards

> Hari

>

> vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > ear Hari

> >

> > Thanks for your mail.

> >

> > Point number 1 - if you share the shlokas,we can discuss.

> >

> > 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,though not a scholar,when supported by

> rational.Strong

> > concerns are only on certain points.''Who are you'' kind of

> > questions can only come out of frustration.If we do not have

> mutual

> > respect,no matter how learned we are ,how do we debate.Though

> > frustration is not a bad word,considering your advise i can be

> more

> > careful.

> >

> > 3)I go by, parashara,evident shlokas and works of scholars from

> > yesteryears and my own discretion.Proposers of new theory have to

> > give evidence.I can only give inconsistencies,which I have given

> in

> > multiples.So have Scholars.

> >

> > 4)We have seen shri Narsimha wonderfully explaining, Pope

> Ratzinger

> > (even Brahma lokamsha) with a wrong chart.Thus let us not talk

> about

> > proof and pudding.First verify possibilty,then analysis.Not

> > degrading the scholar in Narasimha,but pointing the pitfalls.

> >

> > 5)If i do not know something ,i wait and persevere.I do not want

> to

> > go for fast conclusions.Jyotish takes janmas to understand.We

> cannot

> > explain everything in jyotish by putting bhava,especially when not

> > sanctioned.

> >

> > 6)I never said Kshethra is for Body.Kshethra of a planet infact is

> > referring to a limb.All the kshethras together constitute

> body.Rashi

> > chakra and Bhavas together become the system.All the shlokas from

> > parashara refer to bhavas in rashi chakra.Vargas including

> Kshethra

> > refers to individual matters.

> >

> > Regds

> > Pradeep

> >

> > vedic astrology, "onlyhari"

> > <achyutagaddi@g...> wrote:

> > > ||om paramagurave namah||

> > >

> > > Dear Pradeep, namaste

> > >

> > > Sorry to butt into this debate between you and Narasimha. A few

> > > points:

> > >

> > > (1) There are other quotes in BPHS that might indicate the use

> of

> > > houses in vargas but Narasimha has cited a strong candidate. Of

> > > course this is subject to the inductive logic that one uses when

> > > reading BPHS. Do not ask me for these quotes as your questions

> > > forced me to search for it...therefore in the same way you must

> > find

> > > them yourself.

> > >

> > > (2) I agree with Narasimha that some of the words you used are

> not

> > > conducive to a balanced and rational discussion. Even if you had

> > not

> > > intended that these words should convey the meaning as commonly

> > > understood. For example, you used the word 'frustrated' in the

> > below

> > > email. Such words casting or reflective of a biased thinking

> > should

> > > not be there in any debate.

> > >

> > > (3)Your arguments are something similar to Don Quixote with the

> > > difference that you sit on your horse and argue that someone

> else

> > > ought to charge at the windmills! This is totally against the

> > > accepted norms of scholarly debate and the onus is on you to

> prove

> > > your stand in the same way that Narasimha has done. I have been

> > > following your emails from the beginning and there are very few

> > > instances/examples to validate your thinking.

> > >

> > > (4) The proof of pudding is in the timing of events as far as

> > > Jyotisa is concerned. Using your approach, can you demonstrate

> > that

> > > it yields a more consistent and reproducible results when timing

> > the

> > > events? I have done some studies on siddhamsa and my experience

> is

> > > that when treating the siddhamsa as a chart, it is very accurate

> > as

> > > far as the timing of events is concerned.

> > >

> > > (5) Taking the siddhamsa as a specific example, can you please

> > > explain how to analyse it using your approach? How to analyse

> the

> > > siddhamsa vargas within the kshetra?

> > >

> > > (6) I am fascinated by your illustration of the word 'kshetra'.

> > > While acknowledging that it does refer to body, I am puzzled by

> > your

> > > rigid stand on this word...why is it that kshetra must refer to

> > the

> > > body only and not parts of the body? Why cant the heart be

> > referred

> > > to as kshetra when studying it as an independent unit? Ditto for

> > the

> > > liver, spleen etc. Your rigid stand on this word implies that

> the

> > > equivalence of macro-cosmos = micro-cosmos or brahmanda =

> pindanda

> > > is not valid here in the context of vargas. Or in other words,

> > there

> > > is no link between phenomena happening at the micro level

> scalable

> > > to the macro-level.

> > >

> > > best regards

> > > Hari

> > >

> > > PS: I changed the subject of this email string.

> > >

> > > vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > > > 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

> > > >