Interesting Discussion

November 7, 2005

The current discussion is very interesting. But I fail to understand why people

are insisting that there has to be a reference in classics for whatever theory

is used ? The great rishis laid the foundation stone for astrology but there

are many good additions especially in last 50 years. e.g. considering effects

of Herschel , Neptune and Pluto can greatly change the predictions.

So I suggest let people come out with techniques which may or may not have

reference in classics. If the new theory can be proven and can be universally

applied to many case and has a practical relevance then it will withstand or

else people will not accept it.

Anil Gogate

Vishnu Jandhyala <jvishnu > wrote:

|| Hare Rama Krishna ||

Dear Sri Sreenadh,

" Yes, Paditji, you said it right. No where in classics, predictions are given

for aspects (Drishti) in vargas!! Even if a single reference was available, we

could have attributed the absence of such slokas to loss of classics, and the

original tradition. But amazingly not a single such reference is present in

classics!! Which point to the fact that aspects where not at all considered in

Vargas. If somebody brings in a new theory based on Varga charts or D-charts, I

am ready to accept it in an experimental basis, if it is proved useful. But I

won't accept the statement that, 'it is as per classics', in the absence of

quotes that states the same. "

No single reference of drishti in varga charts? really?

ranMdhreshaaMshe tatrikoNe sphutayogaM gate shanau

ranMdhreshadruShTiraashau tu dehopadravamaadishet || 2 / 389 ||

rN<Øeza<ze tiÇkae[e S)…tyaeg< gte znaE

rN<ØezÔ‚iòrazaE tu dehaepÔvmaidzet!.

ranndhreçäàçe tatrikoëe sphutayogaà gate çanau ranndhreçadruñöiräçau tu dehopadravamädiçet

warm regards,

Vishnu

--

Om Akhanda mandalaakaaramvyaptam yena charaa charamtatpadam darsita yena tasmai sri gurave namah

FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

November 8, 2005

Dear Anil,

Vargas and Drishti are two of those foundation stones !!!

Love,

Sreenadh

vedic astrology, Anil Gogate <anil_gogate>

wrote:

>

> The current discussion is very interesting. But I fail to understand

why people are insisting that there has to be a reference in classics

for whatever theory is used ? The great rishis laid the foundation

stone for astrology but there are many good additions especially in

last 50 years. e.g. considering effects of Herschel , Neptune and

Pluto can greatly change the predictions.

>

> So I suggest let people come out with techniques which may or may

not have reference in classics. If the new theory can be proven and

can be universally applied to many case and has a practical relevance

then it will withstand or else people will not accept it.

>

> Anil Gogate

>

> Vishnu Jandhyala <jvishnu@g...> wrote:

>

> || Hare Rama Krishna ||

>

> Dear Sri Sreenadh,

>

> " Yes, Paditji, you said it right. No where in classics, predictions

> are given for aspects (Drishti) in vargas!! Even if a single

reference

> was available, we could have attributed the absence of such slokas

to

> loss of classics, and the original tradition. But amazingly not a

> single such reference is present in classics!! Which point to the

fact

> that aspects where not at all considered in Vargas. If somebody

brings

> in a new theory based on Varga charts or D-charts, I am ready to

> accept it in an experimental basis, if it is proved useful. But I

> won't accept the statement that, 'it is as per classics', in the

> absence of quotes that states the same. "

>

> No single reference of drishti in varga charts? really?

>

> ranMdhreshaaMshe tatrikoNe sphutayogaM gate shanau

>

> ranMdhreshadruShTiraashau tu dehopadravamaadishet || 2 / 389 ||

>

> rN<Øeza<ze tiÇkae[e S)…tyaeg< gte znaE

>

> rN<ØezÔ‚iòrazaE tu dehaepÔvmaidzet!.

>

> ranndhreçäàçe tatrikoëe sphutayogaà gate çanau

> ranndhreçadruñöiräçau tu dehopadravamädiçet

>

> warm regards,

>

> Vishnu

>

> --

>

> Om Akhanda mandalaakaaram

> vyaptam yena charaa charam

> tatpadam darsita yena

> tasmai sri gurave namah

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology- (AT) (DOT)

com

>

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

>

> Astrology chart

>

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

>

> vedic astrology

>

> Terms of

Service.

>

> FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

>

November 8, 2005

I understand your point and I have read Mr. V.D. Bhat's books and his use of

Hershel, Neptune is legendary. He is also an astrologer of great repute and is

a legend.

To me jyotish is a pratyaksha shastra, meaning that one should be able to verify

the shlokas whether appearing in classics or stated in modern books oneself and

be able to do so consistently. I have seen verses from classics that do not pan

out. There are many instances when classical authors have resorted to hyperbole.

Many of these combinations could be present in many a chart and we know that

everyone with that combination is not a king as depicted in classics, nor is he

a rich and famous person like a king or a queen. In Jaimini sutra, there are

results stated for ,if sun, etc. is in karakamsha. Now every month when sun is

at the end of the sign, he will be an atmakara planet for many born on that

day, and ofcourse sun will be in karakamsha id we take it in navansha. We know

all those results attributed to sun in karakamsha can not be true for all these

people. It seems unlikely, although I have not collected horoscopes of 100s of

people who have sun as atmakarak. As we try to decipher this ocean of

literature, add to that people who just rely on translations, it is difficult

to know which of these stated combinations given in so called classics actually

traspires.

Now one can always take a very humble stance and say that, Oh! we are just not

smart enough to understand what the rishis said. I personally think that modern

man ( leave aside the crooks who want to use this as a money making scheme) who

has made such wonderful strides in technology, who can think logically, can not

atleast test these principles for their validity. The problem is that there are

very few who have the time or the inclination to do so. This is an

institutional level effort and needs funding and full time staff.

Now coming to the discussion of divisions and divisioanl charts. I have not

found them to work. Most people who have used them have done so in rearview

mirror. Secondly, when we can not agree upon ayansh to use ( lahiri,

krishnamurthy, Raman) and add on top of it the uncertanty in birth time,how can

we confidently say that these work in practice. Once the answer is known , we

can fit any chart to any data. This is difficult to do if you are using rashi

chart alone and have atleast birth time such that the lagna won't change even

if one adjusts it by a few minutes. That is why using rashi chart alone makes

sense to me. Mr. Finn Wandhl a celebrated astrologer who has practiced this

craft for over 25 years uses mostly rashi chart and prashan chart. May be he

looks at navansh strength.The reason is that he can not be certain of so many

parameters, even if one assumes that there is sanction to using vargas as varga

charts.

I have seen many in academic life, who are called paper publishers or paper

pushers, who keep on publishing papers, over 99 percent of the papers are

worthless. When one goes in the professional life one does not publish

anything, but they practice the things that are based on solid foundation. The

reason they only use stuff that is well grounded in fact and proven over time

is because they are solving actual problems and are responsible to get tangible

results that can be measured.

Same with jyotish, if you want to learn what actually works, go to full time

practicing astrologer, not academicians who are doing consulting on the side

and are just publishing papers.

....

On 11/7/05, Anil Gogate <anil_gogate > wrote: