Guest guest Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 Dear Arjunji: Quite rightly said! Just because Ketu gives detachment, it does not mean he is a benefic.... Detachment is just one of the 8 necessary attitudes for a spiritual seeker (Ashtanga yoga of Shri Patanjali). Infact, detachment without any accompanying spiritual tendency is indicative of psychological problems. The influence of Ketu can turn positive ONLY if the aspirant has a highly evolved spiritual side and that will definitely be indicated by the other planetary placements. Assuming that only Ketu will grant one enlightenment and Moksha is a fallacious belief that has somehow gained currency. I hope Pandit Arjunji's post will clear the mist in this regard. Good post Panditji! Blessed be. vedic astrology, "panditarjun2004" <panditarjun2004> wrote: > > dear friend > > these days painting rank malefic like ketu as a spiritual guide and > the best benefic jupiter as the worst malefic has been gaining > momentum by the researchers. i respect all those researchers and > wish to learn a lesson from them if it makes logic. > > as regards your specific question of ketu drishti or not, in the > original samhitas and other classics, nothing of such sort finds > mention. they were not even allocated own signs or exaltation and > debilitation signs and mooltrikon. > > in my personal experience and limited knowledge, thes two planets > have no signs or aspects and they are pure malefics. some logic by > the researchers is that ketu is a specialist in blocking things and > hence his role of obstruction in life may be construed positively > i.e. if a person leave everything because he is obstructed (hands > up!) and renounce the world, yes ketu in that way is a mokshakaraka > according to them. > > similarly rahu makes one person drive far far away from residence, > be it for job or settlement. in the olden days crossing seas and > settling elsewhere is considered disgrace as the person failed to > eke his livelihood at the homeland. but in the changed world > scenario, the american dream has seen crores of indians settling in > USA and the rules changed. querents started asking when their dream > of settling abroad would happen and the astrologers present in a > positive language that if rahu is in ... he would settle abroad. > this language sounds as if it is a foreign earning or foreign > settlement (beneficial) yoga for which rahu is karak. > > tulsidas in ramcharitmanas writes about ketu "yatha prasiddhi adham > grah ketu" > > so, in my belief these two planets have no aspects nor ketu is > mokshakaraka. > > if you teach me some new revelations, i would be only glad to know > and agree to the same if they are logical. > > with best wishes and regards > arjun > > > vedic astrology, Bharat Hindu Astrology > <hinduastrology@g...> wrote: > > > > Namaskaar Sri Arjun > > > > If we take Rahu and Ketu to be a snake, then Rahu is the head and > Ketu is > > the body. This has a different meaning, according to my > understanding. > > Rahu-Ketu are always opposite to each other. One involves and the > other > > tries to make you detached. To detach and to be involve are two > sides of the > > same coin. All their qualities are opposites of each other. They > represent, > > in my understanding, the dwandhas. > > > > The analogy of Rahu-Ketu being a snake is that when the snake > holds its own > > tail and makes the symbol "0" it represents endless cycle of > attachment to > > the dwandhas. Zero is the symbol of Maya. Understanding them as > one, symbol > > "1", one realizes the unity of the Lord. If Zero is Added on the > right hand > > side to 1, it gives rise to multiplicity (the samsara). Rahu keeps > involving > > in lending reality to Name and Form, whereas, Ketu is foreover > trying to > > break it. In that sense, Ketu can be compared to Mumukshatvam. > > > > When, an individual realizes the effect of dwandhas, and uses his > > experiences with the dwandhas to realize the wholeness, then, it > breaks free > > of the dwandhas. (Here the symbol is Infinity). > > > > For example, to accept money and reject money, means you have a > value for > > it. No value means, that whether money is there or not, it does > not mean > > anything to the individual. > > > > Therefore, that Rahu-Ketu is a snake is an analogy. It is a very > separate > > analogy from Rahu having the head of a demon (with snake body) and > Ketu the > > body of a demon (with snake head). To confuse the two would cause > endless > > problems. > > > > I can give atleast one reference of a famous temple that worships > Ketu with > > the Snake head and demon's body. It is in Kumbakonam, near > > Tirachchirirappalli and is also called Vanagiri. > > > > The imaginary planets concept comes from the fact, that they are, > probably, > > the dwaarpals of Maya. Rahu causes the illusion and the > imagination that the > > possession of limited objects and goals can give infinite > happiness. Rahu, > > lends that Reality, to limited objects. (A very beautiful > statement was made > > by a prominent Astrologer - that Rahu is not an illusion - it is a > Reality > > that is not sustainable). This is very close to understanding > Rahu, it gives > > Reality to limitation! and is foreover devising new ways to end it > while > > involved in the world (inventiveness). Ketu understands that > limitation can > > be broken by rejecting the object and the goal, therefore its > effect is of > > rejection, in doing so it rejects new ideas etc too. > > > > Consider this too, Rahu is foreover into the future. It is foreover > > thinking, what to do in the future, to overcome this limitation. > It lends > > Reality to the future. Ketu is foreover using past experiences to > overcome > > the limitation and it lends reality to past. Both give reality to > Time. > > > > The above is my understanding of Rahu and Ketu. I have tried to > present it > > in the simplest manner and also knowing that I could be very wrong > about the > > same. Please pardon my errors, as being in the womb of the Cosmic > Mother, > > she isn't visible clearly. > > > > I still need to know more on- whether or not Ketu has an aspect. > What is > > the definition of Mokshakaraka? What is the nature of Ketu as a > > Mokshakaraka? > > > > I request you and everyone to share their respective thoughts. > > > > Thanks and Regards > > Bharat > > > > > > On 1/21/06, panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004> wrote: > > > > > > dear bharat ji > > > > > > your insight on these two malefics is thought provoking. > > > > > > in my limited knowledge, the holy scriptures describe that rahu > has > > > the same rakshasa head and the body of a serpant while ketu has > the > > > body of the rakshasa and the head of a serpant. > > > > > > however, since rahu and ketu are non existing planets and were > only > > > given planet status, and also because they two together form an > > > imaginary serpant that swallows sun and moon (is it because sun > and > > > moon complained against the undivided rahu+ketu) during the > eclipse, > > > rahu and ketu are treated as the head and tail of the same > serpant. > > > even as per the original puranic description also, both rahu and > > > ketu share the same serpant, body by rahu and head by ketu. > > > > > > if the above is true, please advise why in navagraha mandirs, > rahu > > > is worshipped only as head and ketu is worshipped as headless. > > > > > > all original samhitas and classicals had only touch and go > approach > > > with rahu and ketu and these two planets did not find any mention > > > either for yuti results (conjunction) or for any yogas. > > > > > > but if these two are only imaginary planets, how come 18 years > and 7 > > > years mahadasa were attributed to these non-existing planets. > > > > > > also if these two are non-existing planets, how come stones are > also > > > attributed to them. > > > > > > would appreciate if you share your knowledge on the above. > > > > > > with best wishes > > > arjun > > > > > > vedic astrology, Bharat Hindu Astrology > > > <hinduastrology@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Namaskaar All > > > > > > > > "Andham tamah pravishanti ye' vidyaam-upaasate > > > > Tato bhuuya ivaa te, tamo ya u vidyaayaam rataah" > > > > > > > > Those devoted to illusion enter blind darkness. Into greater > > > darkness enter > > > > those who are solely attached to knowledge" - Isha Upanishad > Verse > > > 9 > > > > > > > > On June 14, 2005, in the list of Srijagannatha, we were > discussing > > > whether > > > > or not Ketu has a head. This was being done to find out, > whether > > > or not, > > > > Ketu had an aspect. I had mentioned a story that Ketu does > have a > > > head. It > > > > has the head of a snake. The story was that the demon was cut > into > > > by Lord > > > > Vishnu into two parts Rahu and Ketu, then, the Lord cut a snake > > > and gave the > > > > body to Rahu and head to Ketu to complete them. (The > discussion > > > was between > > > > Sri Sarbani, Sri Lakshmi Kary, Sri Himanshu Mohan and some > others > > > and I was > > > > a part to it too) > > > > > > > > Many think it is the other way round. They think Rahu is the > head > > > of the > > > > snake. Rahu has the head of a demon and not of a snake. > > > > > > > > Related to this was that was the argument, since Ketu does not > > > have a head, > > > > it cannot cast a glance. Therefore, it cannot have a graha > dristi > > > or if can > > > > losely translate it as an aspect. > > > > > > > > Ketu is called the "Moksha Karaka". Some believe that it > signifies > > > the > > > > moksha. If we say, that Ketu signifies Moksha, then, we are > > > effectively > > > > saying that our Natal chart has a significator for Moksha. > Which > > > means we > > > > can find out from the chart, when and how Moksha will happen. > Now, > > > if we say > > > > that, then, we are saying that the Natalchart, that is born of > > > Maya, is > > > > showing Moksha. Secondly, we are saying that the Moksha is > shown > > > by a Graha. > > > > The meaning of a Graha is that the one which seizes our > thinking > > > to believe > > > > the limited self. Can such a graha show Moksha? I doubt it. > > > Therefore, what > > > > is the meaning of Moksha Karaka? How do you define it? Is it > > > showing Moksha? > > > > Is it the cause of Moksha? Is it want for Moksha? > > > > > > > > Veda is clear. There is no cause for Moksha. That I am free is > an > > > already > > > > achieved end. There is nothing to be achieved. It is a > question of > > > > realization. "Na Karmana, Na Prajaya Dhanena, Tyage naike, > > > amritatvamanashuh" > > > > (Upanishad) is the statment of the Veda. Nor by any action, > nor by > > > progeny > > > > or wealth (results), one realizes. It is through giving up of > the > > > thoughts, > > > > which strengthens the individuality, that one realizes the > whole. > > > Which > > > > essentially means, negating (neti, neti) all thoughts that > pretain > > > oneself > > > > to be a limited human being. > > > > > > > > So the argument that Ketu cannot have a desire (graha dristi), > is > > > currently > > > > unagreeable for me. Ketu, though having a desire - it is > desire of > > > not > > > > wanting other desires. Mumukshatvam is a desire for knowing the > > > self. This > > > > desire is based on the understanding that Artha and Kama > pursuits > > > can only > > > > give oneself limited fulfillment. > > > > > > > > It is very important to understand that every desire is a > desire > > > for > > > > liberation - only the goal is misplaced. Artha and Kama are > > > misplaced as > > > > people seek fulfillment and yet try to achieve that through > > > limited objects. > > > > But they too are desire for liberation. A liberation > from "one's > > > wanting > > > > self". The goal of every desire is to cessate. In Mukumshatvam, > > > this goal > > > > becomes clearer and one develops viveka - "Discrimination > between > > > the self > > > > and the non-self" - between Sat, chit, ananda and Naam -rupa > (Drig > > > Drshya > > > > Viveka). > > > > > > > > Veda is supreme. Purana is story form teaching of the Veda. If > > > understanding > > > > of a story is incomplete and in conflict with the Veda, it > cannot > > > be > > > > accepted. > > > > > > > > In that sense, isn't it likely that Ketu is showing > mumukshatvam > > > and not > > > > Moksha? Since it is a desire, does it now show graha dristi? > > > Should it not > > > > be the drishti, that destroyes the kama and the artha dristi of > > > other > > > > grahas? > > > > > > > > A very learned and a very respected Guru of Astrology, jokingly > > > remarked > > > > about ketu's dristi by saying "Maybe it has eyes in the > stomach, > > > and > > > > therefore, one walks in the direction of the stomach". To > whom, I > > > would say > > > > I respect his views, but my search isn't rested. I would not > > > accept this > > > > statement, unless it becomes crystal clear to me. > > > > > > > > I request everyone who has knowledge of the same to respond and > > > give their > > > > views. It is my request to read my post with an open heart and, > > > then, > > > > respond. > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards > > > > Bharat > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Group info: vedic- > astrology/info.html > > > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology- > > > > > > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Astrology chart</gads? > t=ms&k=Astrology+chart&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=Astro > logy+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&. sig=UoktiPHSoTwQkpGMXB > NeEg> Vedic > > > astrology</gads? > t=ms&k=Vedic+astrology&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=Astro > logy+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&. sig=qNtEn5POAbTpzmtNKI > dnHA> Astrology > > > horoscope</gads? > t=ms&k=Astrology+horoscope&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=A > strology+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&.sig=8kShDb5zI- > EsRMSq6tgiew> Astrology > > > software</gads? > t=ms&k=Astrology+software&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=As > trology+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&. sig=Je51jg697mjdLNt > 6iLuaCw> > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > - Visit your group "vedic- > astrology<vedic astrology>" > > > on the web. > > > > > > - > > > vedic astrology<vedic astrology- > ?subject=Un> > > > > > > - Terms of > > > Service <>. > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 Dear Dakshinamoorthi ji, What is the effect of Ketu and Jupiter in the 8th house for a Scorpio lagna female/male? Also kindly teach us, whether there is a different result occurs due different aspects ofMars ,Jupiter and Saturn? i.e. whether the 4th aspect of Mars gives different result as that of 7th or 8 th aspect of it? Also regarding Saturn and JUpiter too. Thank you. Saman vedic astrology, "dakshinastrologer" <dakshinastrologer> wrote: > > Dear Arjunji: > > Quite rightly said! Just because Ketu gives detachment, it does not > mean he is a benefic.... Detachment is just one of the 8 necessary > attitudes for a spiritual seeker (Ashtanga yoga of Shri Patanjali). > Infact, detachment without any accompanying spiritual tendency is > indicative of psychological problems. The influence of Ketu can turn > positive ONLY if the aspirant has a highly evolved spiritual side and > that will definitely be indicated by the other planetary placements. > Assuming that only Ketu will grant one enlightenment and Moksha is a > fallacious belief that has somehow gained currency. I hope Pandit > Arjunji's post will clear the mist in this regard. > > Good post Panditji! > > Blessed be. > vedic astrology, "panditarjun2004" > <panditarjun2004> wrote: > > > > dear friend > > > > these days painting rank malefic like ketu as a spiritual guide and > > the best benefic jupiter as the worst malefic has been gaining > > momentum by the researchers. i respect all those researchers and > > wish to learn a lesson from them if it makes logic. > > > > as regards your specific question of ketu drishti or not, in the > > original samhitas and other classics, nothing of such sort finds > > mention. they were not even allocated own signs or exaltation and > > debilitation signs and mooltrikon. > > > > in my personal experience and limited knowledge, thes two planets > > have no signs or aspects and they are pure malefics. some logic by > > the researchers is that ketu is a specialist in blocking things and > > hence his role of obstruction in life may be construed positively > > i.e. if a person leave everything because he is obstructed (hands > > up!) and renounce the world, yes ketu in that way is a mokshakaraka > > according to them. > > > > similarly rahu makes one person drive far far away from residence, > > be it for job or settlement. in the olden days crossing seas and > > settling elsewhere is considered disgrace as the person failed to > > eke his livelihood at the homeland. but in the changed world > > scenario, the american dream has seen crores of indians settling in > > USA and the rules changed. querents started asking when their dream > > of settling abroad would happen and the astrologers present in a > > positive language that if rahu is in ... he would settle abroad. > > this language sounds as if it is a foreign earning or foreign > > settlement (beneficial) yoga for which rahu is karak. > > > > tulsidas in ramcharitmanas writes about ketu "yatha prasiddhi adham > > grah ketu" > > > > so, in my belief these two planets have no aspects nor ketu is > > mokshakaraka. > > > > if you teach me some new revelations, i would be only glad to know > > and agree to the same if they are logical. > > > > with best wishes and regards > > arjun > > > > > > vedic astrology, Bharat Hindu Astrology > > <hinduastrology@g...> wrote: > > > > > > Namaskaar Sri Arjun > > > > > > If we take Rahu and Ketu to be a snake, then Rahu is the head and > > Ketu is > > > the body. This has a different meaning, according to my > > understanding. > > > Rahu-Ketu are always opposite to each other. One involves and the > > other > > > tries to make you detached. To detach and to be involve are two > > sides of the > > > same coin. All their qualities are opposites of each other. They > > represent, > > > in my understanding, the dwandhas. > > > > > > The analogy of Rahu-Ketu being a snake is that when the snake > > holds its own > > > tail and makes the symbol "0" it represents endless cycle of > > attachment to > > > the dwandhas. Zero is the symbol of Maya. Understanding them as > > one, symbol > > > "1", one realizes the unity of the Lord. If Zero is Added on the > > right hand > > > side to 1, it gives rise to multiplicity (the samsara). Rahu keeps > > involving > > > in lending reality to Name and Form, whereas, Ketu is foreover > > trying to > > > break it. In that sense, Ketu can be compared to Mumukshatvam. > > > > > > When, an individual realizes the effect of dwandhas, and uses his > > > experiences with the dwandhas to realize the wholeness, then, it > > breaks free > > > of the dwandhas. (Here the symbol is Infinity). > > > > > > For example, to accept money and reject money, means you have a > > value for > > > it. No value means, that whether money is there or not, it does > > not mean > > > anything to the individual. > > > > > > Therefore, that Rahu-Ketu is a snake is an analogy. It is a very > > separate > > > analogy from Rahu having the head of a demon (with snake body) and > > Ketu the > > > body of a demon (with snake head). To confuse the two would cause > > endless > > > problems. > > > > > > I can give atleast one reference of a famous temple that worships > > Ketu with > > > the Snake head and demon's body. It is in Kumbakonam, near > > > Tirachchirirappalli and is also called Vanagiri. > > > > > > The imaginary planets concept comes from the fact, that they are, > > probably, > > > the dwaarpals of Maya. Rahu causes the illusion and the > > imagination that the > > > possession of limited objects and goals can give infinite > > happiness. Rahu, > > > lends that Reality, to limited objects. (A very beautiful > > statement was made > > > by a prominent Astrologer - that Rahu is not an illusion - it is a > > Reality > > > that is not sustainable). This is very close to understanding > > Rahu, it gives > > > Reality to limitation! and is foreover devising new ways to end it > > while > > > involved in the world (inventiveness). Ketu understands that > > limitation can > > > be broken by rejecting the object and the goal, therefore its > > effect is of > > > rejection, in doing so it rejects new ideas etc too. > > > > > > Consider this too, Rahu is foreover into the future. It is > foreover > > > thinking, what to do in the future, to overcome this limitation. > > It lends > > > Reality to the future. Ketu is foreover using past experiences to > > overcome > > > the limitation and it lends reality to past. Both give reality to > > Time. > > > > > > The above is my understanding of Rahu and Ketu. I have tried to > > present it > > > in the simplest manner and also knowing that I could be very wrong > > about the > > > same. Please pardon my errors, as being in the womb of the Cosmic > > Mother, > > > she isn't visible clearly. > > > > > > I still need to know more on- whether or not Ketu has an aspect. > > What is > > > the definition of Mokshakaraka? What is the nature of Ketu as a > > > Mokshakaraka? > > > > > > I request you and everyone to share their respective thoughts. > > > > > > Thanks and Regards > > > Bharat > > > > > > > > > On 1/21/06, panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > dear bharat ji > > > > > > > > your insight on these two malefics is thought provoking. > > > > > > > > in my limited knowledge, the holy scriptures describe that rahu > > has > > > > the same rakshasa head and the body of a serpant while ketu has > > the > > > > body of the rakshasa and the head of a serpant. > > > > > > > > however, since rahu and ketu are non existing planets and were > > only > > > > given planet status, and also because they two together form an > > > > imaginary serpant that swallows sun and moon (is it because sun > > and > > > > moon complained against the undivided rahu+ketu) during the > > eclipse, > > > > rahu and ketu are treated as the head and tail of the same > > serpant. > > > > even as per the original puranic description also, both rahu and > > > > ketu share the same serpant, body by rahu and head by ketu. > > > > > > > > if the above is true, please advise why in navagraha mandirs, > > rahu > > > > is worshipped only as head and ketu is worshipped as headless. > > > > > > > > all original samhitas and classicals had only touch and go > > approach > > > > with rahu and ketu and these two planets did not find any > mention > > > > either for yuti results (conjunction) or for any yogas. > > > > > > > > but if these two are only imaginary planets, how come 18 years > > and 7 > > > > years mahadasa were attributed to these non-existing planets. > > > > > > > > also if these two are non-existing planets, how come stones are > > also > > > > attributed to them. > > > > > > > > would appreciate if you share your knowledge on the above. > > > > > > > > with best wishes > > > > arjun > > > > > > > > vedic astrology, Bharat Hindu Astrology > > > > <hinduastrology@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Namaskaar All > > > > > > > > > > "Andham tamah pravishanti ye' vidyaam-upaasate > > > > > Tato bhuuya ivaa te, tamo ya u vidyaayaam rataah" > > > > > > > > > > Those devoted to illusion enter blind darkness. Into greater > > > > darkness enter > > > > > those who are solely attached to knowledge" - Isha Upanishad > > Verse > > > > 9 > > > > > > > > > > On June 14, 2005, in the list of Srijagannatha, we were > > discussing > > > > whether > > > > > or not Ketu has a head. This was being done to find out, > > whether > > > > or not, > > > > > Ketu had an aspect. I had mentioned a story that Ketu does > > have a > > > > head. It > > > > > has the head of a snake. The story was that the demon was cut > > into > > > > by Lord > > > > > Vishnu into two parts Rahu and Ketu, then, the Lord cut a > snake > > > > and gave the > > > > > body to Rahu and head to Ketu to complete them. (The > > discussion > > > > was between > > > > > Sri Sarbani, Sri Lakshmi Kary, Sri Himanshu Mohan and some > > others > > > > and I was > > > > > a part to it too) > > > > > > > > > > Many think it is the other way round. They think Rahu is the > > head > > > > of the > > > > > snake. Rahu has the head of a demon and not of a snake. > > > > > > > > > > Related to this was that was the argument, since Ketu does > not > > > > have a head, > > > > > it cannot cast a glance. Therefore, it cannot have a graha > > dristi > > > > or if can > > > > > losely translate it as an aspect. > > > > > > > > > > Ketu is called the "Moksha Karaka". Some believe that it > > signifies > > > > the > > > > > moksha. If we say, that Ketu signifies Moksha, then, we are > > > > effectively > > > > > saying that our Natal chart has a significator for Moksha. > > Which > > > > means we > > > > > can find out from the chart, when and how Moksha will happen. > > Now, > > > > if we say > > > > > that, then, we are saying that the Natalchart, that is born of > > > > Maya, is > > > > > showing Moksha. Secondly, we are saying that the Moksha is > > shown > > > > by a Graha. > > > > > The meaning of a Graha is that the one which seizes our > > thinking > > > > to believe > > > > > the limited self. Can such a graha show Moksha? I doubt it. > > > > Therefore, what > > > > > is the meaning of Moksha Karaka? How do you define it? Is it > > > > showing Moksha? > > > > > Is it the cause of Moksha? Is it want for Moksha? > > > > > > > > > > Veda is clear. There is no cause for Moksha. That I am free is > > an > > > > already > > > > > achieved end. There is nothing to be achieved. It is a > > question of > > > > > realization. "Na Karmana, Na Prajaya Dhanena, Tyage naike, > > > > amritatvamanashuh" > > > > > (Upanishad) is the statment of the Veda. Nor by any action, > > nor by > > > > progeny > > > > > or wealth (results), one realizes. It is through giving up of > > the > > > > thoughts, > > > > > which strengthens the individuality, that one realizes the > > whole. > > > > Which > > > > > essentially means, negating (neti, neti) all thoughts that > > pretain > > > > oneself > > > > > to be a limited human being. > > > > > > > > > > So the argument that Ketu cannot have a desire (graha dristi), > > is > > > > currently > > > > > unagreeable for me. Ketu, though having a desire - it is > > desire of > > > > not > > > > > wanting other desires. Mumukshatvam is a desire for knowing > the > > > > self. This > > > > > desire is based on the understanding that Artha and Kama > > pursuits > > > > can only > > > > > give oneself limited fulfillment. > > > > > > > > > > It is very important to understand that every desire is a > > desire > > > > for > > > > > liberation - only the goal is misplaced. Artha and Kama are > > > > misplaced as > > > > > people seek fulfillment and yet try to achieve that through > > > > limited objects. > > > > > But they too are desire for liberation. A liberation > > from "one's > > > > wanting > > > > > self". The goal of every desire is to cessate. In > Mukumshatvam, > > > > this goal > > > > > becomes clearer and one develops viveka - "Discrimination > > between > > > > the self > > > > > and the non-self" - between Sat, chit, ananda and Naam - rupa > > (Drig > > > > Drshya > > > > > Viveka). > > > > > > > > > > Veda is supreme. Purana is story form teaching of the Veda. If > > > > understanding > > > > > of a story is incomplete and in conflict with the Veda, it > > cannot > > > > be > > > > > accepted. > > > > > > > > > > In that sense, isn't it likely that Ketu is showing > > mumukshatvam > > > > and not > > > > > Moksha? Since it is a desire, does it now show graha dristi? > > > > Should it not > > > > > be the drishti, that destroyes the kama and the artha dristi > of > > > > other > > > > > grahas? > > > > > > > > > > A very learned and a very respected Guru of Astrology, > jokingly > > > > remarked > > > > > about ketu's dristi by saying "Maybe it has eyes in the > > stomach, > > > > and > > > > > therefore, one walks in the direction of the stomach". To > > whom, I > > > > would say > > > > > I respect his views, but my search isn't rested. I would not > > > > accept this > > > > > statement, unless it becomes crystal clear to me. > > > > > > > > > > I request everyone who has knowledge of the same to respond > and > > > > give their > > > > > views. It is my request to read my post with an open heart > and, > > > > then, > > > > > respond. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and Regards > > > > > Bharat > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Group info: vedic- > > astrology/info.html > > > > > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology- > > > > > > > > > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Astrology chart</gads? > > > t=ms&k=Astrology+chart&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=Astro > > logy+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&. > sig=UoktiPHSoTwQkpGMXB > > NeEg> Vedic > > > > astrology</gads? > > > t=ms&k=Vedic+astrology&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=Astro > > logy+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&. > sig=qNtEn5POAbTpzmtNKI > > dnHA> Astrology > > > > horoscope</gads? > > > t=ms&k=Astrology+horoscope&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=A > > strology+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&.sig=8kShDb5zI- > > EsRMSq6tgiew> Astrology > > > > software</gads? > > > t=ms&k=Astrology+software&w1=Astrology+chart&w2=Vedic+astrology&w3=As > > trology+horoscope&w4=Astrology+software&c=4&s=91&. > sig=Je51jg697mjdLNt > > 6iLuaCw> > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Visit your group "vedic- > > astrology<vedic astrology>" > > > > on the web. > > > > > > > > - > > > > vedic astrology<vedic- astrology- > > ?subject=Un> > > > > > > > > - Terms > of > > > > Service <>. > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.