Fwd: Ketu Drishti or Not? (Let's settle this nodal issue once and for all)

[Guest guest]

Dear Shreenadhji/members,

The Hora treatise you quote cannot be faulted, nor anyone who would

go by the proper rishi vakya.

 

The issue is tough. We have inhered Rahu and Ketu in our system

since long, yet we have not agreed on their rulership or non-

rulership, their exaltation and fall. We go by Surya-paraga analogy

of their affliction upon assocaition and placement. That is

particularly so because Vimsottari Dasa is the most widely used core

directional tool; and at this stage of our adaptation since the

times of rishis, we can't do without Rahu and Ketu, or can we if we

choose to be purists?

 

I for one, like Shree Shreenadh, would be, and kind of am, in the

purists league.

 

But let's accord proper quarters to the these twin dark horses. We

have, since the time of Kalidasa, not cringed in our imagination

while expounding on their Karakatwas -- from grandparents to what

have you. But when it comes to assigning them mansions, we waffle.

 

A member toady writes (in posting 'Exaltation of Ketu') to ask which

is Ketu's exaltation sign: Sag or Scorpio? The doubt is justified.

And cannot be brushwed aside as too elementary for learned senior

members.

 

We have kept the nodes in a half-way house for far too long.

 

Best,

RK Dash

 

 

vedic astrology, "Sreenadh" <sreelid

wrote:

>

> , "Sreenadh" <sreelid@> wrote:

>

> Dear Bharat ji, and David ji,

> Ketu is also known as 'Agu' meaning the planet with out 'go'

i.e.

> Rays (Rasmi). Some people take it as a reason for not

> having 'Drishti' for Rahu and Ketu, that are nodal points/shadows

> that depict the rhythm of Solar system but does not reflect the

rays

> of sun.

> Now coming back to the word Drishti, it specifically

means "Relative

> angle between the planets, when we take earth/native as the center

of

> effect" (call it geo-centric or something else), since we are

> considering the effect on us (people who are living on earth, and

> influenced by the rhythm of the solar system or the whole universe

> around us).

> If "Drishti" means "relative angle between planets" then for sure

> Rahu and Ketu can also have Drishti!!

> Now what are we going to do? Are going to get confused about

Drishti

> and Rasmi? Or are we going to explore how they are related?

> Points:

> -------

> 1) If you agree on the point If "Drishti" means "relative angle

> between planets" then for sure Rahu and Ketu can also have

Drishti!!

> (As Parasara said)

> 2) If you consider "Drishti" as something closely related to the

> concept of Rasmi (meaning Rays), then Rahu and Ketu can not have

> Drishti, as they are 'Agu' (Shadows which can not reflect sun's

rays).

> 3) The available slokas of Rishi horas like Skanda Hora etc does

not

> speak about Drishti of Rahu and Ketu, because they have

explicitaly

> stated: "Ethe saptha su visrantha, yoga sarve mayodita", Meaning

> their prediction system is entirely based on the 7 planets

(including

> Sun the star, and Moon the satellite, but excluding the shadows

Rahu

> and Ketu). It is due to this reason (ancient astrological system

is

> based on 7 planets only) that lordship of signs are also allotted

> only to the 7 planets and not Rahu and Ketu.

>

> I think this may make the subject clear to a certain extent.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , Chandrashekhar

> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Bharat,

> >

> > I hope I do not raise any hackles by saying what I have to say

here.

> >

> > The very argument that a graha has head or body and therefore

> drishti,

> > does not appear to have any basis in Shastras, at least I have

not

> read

> > any such statement in any of the astrological classics that I

have

> read.

> > If any body has any quote, I would like to read it. If that

> > argument(Grahas having eyes and needing head to cast aspect) is

to

> be

> > accepted then the Rasis will also have to have a single body,

and

> > especially head to cast drishti. Again there is no unanimity

> amongst

> > astrologers about Rahu and Ketu having drishti. Only one or two

> > editions of BPHS mention drishti of Rahu, while most other

classics

> do

> > not talk about drishti of Rahu and Ketu. One should also think

why

> the

> > nodes are called Chaaya grahas or Tamo grahas by the Acharyas in

> the

> > first place. About Ketu and Moksha, the word has many meanings

one

> of

> > which is emancipation.

> >

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> , "David Hawthorne" <david@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Bharat:

> >

> > Namaskar....

> >

> > Thank you very much for your eloquent post on Ketu....

> >

> > It was a wonderful reminder of the higher realms of knowledge

and

> jyotish.

> >

> > On a mundane level and in my experience, Ketu seems to have an

> impact on any planet within close range by conjunction, or through

> its dhristi on the fifth, seventh and ninth bhavas from its natal

or

> transit position.

> >

> > Maybe we can say that Ketu enlivens the desire for moksha --

> through karma and the breaking the bonds of attachment.

> >

> > Hence, a person in a Ketu dasha or transit may experience

> suffering, which becomes the source of spiritual awakening.

> >

> > Best wishes to you and yours,

> >

> > David Hawthorne

> > Bharat Hindu Astrology 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

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

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

---

> ------

> > >

> > >

> > > * Visit your group "

> > > <>" on the web.

> > >

> > > *

> > >

> > > <?

> subject=Un>

> > >

> > > *

Terms of

> > > Service <>.

> > >

> > >

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

---

> ------

> > >

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

---

> ------

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.14.20/234 - Release

Date:

> 1/18/2006

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> --- End forwarded message ---

>