Ancient View on Signs and Houses.

[Guest guest]

Dear friends,

The following is a short article on a controversial issue.

I would like to know your views on the same.

With warm regards,

Sreenadh

 

Sign and House are the same

===========================

We may think that Sign are House are different, because there

are so many methods - such as one put forward by Sreepathi (10th

century), Krishnamoorthi, 30 Degree equal division etc. Now what was

the opinion of ancient Rishis on this subject? Have they considered

Sign and House differently - except from the fact that Signs starts

from Aris and Houses starts from the Ascendant? Let us go through

some of the available refferences.

Parasara

--------

If you use Jagannatha hora program to calculate houses, you

already know, of many methods for calculating houses the first option

is, `Each Rasi is a house (Parasari /True Vedic)'. Which itself shows

that PVR and Rath has done sufficient study on the subject and came

to the conclusion that Parasara considered `Each Sign as a House'. I

take it as sufficient proof and do not want to discuss the slokas put

forward by Parasara in detail. Let us see what are the opinions of

others.

Varahamihira (6th Century)

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

Varahamihira says that - `Rasi kshethra griharksha bhani

bhavanam chaikardha samprethyaye'. Which means - the words Rasi,

Kshethra, Griha, Riksha, Bham and Bhavanam are used in the same

meaning through out the text Varahahora. (Note the fact that the

words Rasi and Griha are used in the same meaning). Ok. For that

what? I will explain. In the 15th sloka of the first chapter he

states that -

`Horadayasthanu kudumba sahotdha bandhu-

puthrari pathni maranani subhaspadaya

ribhakhyamithyupachanyari karma labha-

duschithka samgjitha "grihani" na nithyameke'

Which means that - the Houses (Grihani) starting from

ascendant have the names Thanu (Body -Ascendant), Kudumba (Own house -

2nd house), Sahotdha (Brothers - 3rd house), Bandhu (Relatives - 4th

house), Puthra (Son - 5th house), Ari (Enemy - 6th house), Pathni

(Wife - 7th house), Marana (Death - 8th house), Subha (Good things -

9th house), Aspada (Job - 10th house), Aya (Earnings - 11th house),

Ribha (Expenditure - 12th house).

Everybody will accept the fact that houses are mentioned

here. I am attracting your attention to the word, which was used to

describe these houses - it is `Griha'. In earlier statement

Varahamihira has already said that the words Griha and Rasi and used

in the same name throughout his text. Is it not a convincing evidence

for the fact that Varahamihira considered Sign (Rasi) and house as

the same? If you are not convinced read the next sloka of the same

text.

'Kalya swa vikrama griha prethibha kshethani

chithodha randhra guru mana bhava vyeyani

legnachathurdha nidhane chathurasra samjche

dunam cha sapthama "griham" desamarkshamajcha'

Which means (only the relevant portion) - the houses (Griham)

starting from the ascendant have the names Kalya (Fame - Ascendant),

Swa (Assets - 2nd house), Vikrama (Courage - 3rd house), Griha (House

were you are born - 4th house), Prethibha (Intelligence - 5th house),

Kshethani (Wounds - 6th house), Chithodha (Ego - 7th house), Randhra

(8th house), Guru (Teacher - 9th house), Mana (Proudness - 10th

house), Bhava (Next birth - 11th house), Vyeya (Expenditure - 12th

house).

Here also note the fact that the word Griha is used - which

explicitly means Sign and House at the same time, because the words

Sign and House means the same thing, with the only difference that

Signs are counted from Aris while the Houses are counted from

Ascendant.

Therefore it becomes clear that even at the period of 6th

century AD, Signs and Houses are considered the same. It was people

like Sreepathi (10th century) who made all the confusion by

interpreting Sign and House as two different entities, and by

providing new techniques of the calculation of Houses. (And just

look - in what a mess we are!! There are 5 or more methods for

calculating house!! In which we should depend on?! I don't want to go

into the detail).

Even after all this happened there were learned scholars who

never let away the correct system - and if you are not convinced read

Krishneeyam and Saravali.

Krishneeyam

-----------

Krishneeyam is written by one krishnacharya who probably

lived in the 13th Century AD. A well-known and fascinating commentary

for this classic text is chathura-sundari, written by Vishnu (the son

of madhavacharya who has written madhaveeya).

While commenting on the 9th sloka of Krishneeyam, he

says, "adha moorthyadishu dvadesa rasishu dwadesha bhavanaha". Which

means, `Starting from the ascendant the twelve signs are also known

as twelve houses'. This is so clear and explicit a statement, that no

true learner of astrology can deny the fact that, Vishnu considered

Signs and Houses as the same thing. This also points to the fact

that, Krishnacharya and Madhavacharya also considered Signs and

Houses as the same thing.

Conclusion

----------

If all these ancient acharyas (Rishis, Parasara,

Varahamihira, Krishnacharya, Madhavacharya, Kalyanavarama etc)

considered Sign and House as the same thing, who are we to say that

they are different. Therefore any true learner of Vedic astrology,

should accept and follow the path shown by these acharyas, and

consider Sign and House as the same thing. (Probably Sreepathi had

started all this trouble)

With warm regards,

Sreenadh

Email: Sreelid