Guest guest Posted June 23, 2006 Report Share Posted June 23, 2006 Dear Hari Namaste Take planets Mercury/Mars/Jupiter -placed in the first degree of Aries,Mars/Sag respectively.They are physically,(OK lets say relative/apparent) present within the boundaries of Aries/Leo/Sag.Distance between Mars/Mercury is 120 degrees and Mars/Jupiter is 240 degrees(Physical seperation).(Apparent need not be a concern as ,we follow the SAME benchmark(w.r to earth) for all Rashi Chakra placements). Now let us take Navamsha.All the three are drawn as conjunct in Aries.Do you think it is an apparent conjunction as above?.Then what is navamsha?First 3.2 degrees of any FIRY sign is always assigned to Aries.Any planet placed within this degree span will relate to Aries as navamsha.This is a tattwa based sambandha and does not represent any placement.On the other hand Rashi chakra placement is an astronomically measured value,adjusted for ayanamsha correction.Distance/Conjunction in Rashi chakra -points towards physical seperation/proximity while navamsha points towards sambandhas.It has no connection with distance.Hope the difference is clear this time. |om| Dear Pradeep, namaste M-W dictionary defines conjunction as given below: con·junc·tion Function: noun 1 : the act or an instance of conjoining : the state of being conjoined : 2 : occurrence together in time or space : 3 a : the apparent meeting or passing of two or more celestial bodies in the same degree of the zodiac b : a configuration in which two celestial bodies have their least apparent separation 4 : an uninflected linguistic form that joins together sentences, clauses, phrases, or words 5 : a complex sentence in logic true if and only if each of its components is true Note meaning (3a) above. It says apparent and not PHYSICAL. Physically conjunct is a non-reality. Thus when viewed against the backdrop of the rasi, we say that two planets are conjunct when they appear to be in the same rasi. This is apparent and not true in reality. As pointed out earlier, rasi is also imaginary; it has no physical boundaries in space. The point I am driving at is that when we say that two planets are conjunct in a rasi purely on a non-physical basis (apparent), what is wrong with defining similar conjunctions in vargas? Regarding varga (division) + uttama (best) = vargottama, M-W (Monier- Williams) dictionary gives the following meanings for uttama: uppermost, highest, chief, most elevated, principal, best , excellent RV. AV. AitBr. Mn. Pan5cat. &c. (often ifc. , e.g. % {dvijo7ttama} , best of the twice-born i.e. a Bra1hman Mn.) first, greatest, the highest (tone) the most removed or last in place or order or time etc. best regards Hari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2006 Report Share Posted June 24, 2006 , "vijayadas_pradeep" <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Hari Namaste > > Take planets Mercury/Mars/Jupiter -placed in the first degree of > Aries,Mars/Sag respectively.They are physically,(OK lets say > relative/apparent) present within the boundaries of > Aries/Leo/Sag.Distance between Mars/Mercury is 120 degrees and > Mars/Jupiter is 240 degrees(Physical seperation).(Apparent need not > be a concern as ,we follow the SAME benchmark(w.r to earth) for all > Rashi Chakra placements). > > Now let us take Navamsha.All the three are drawn as conjunct in > Aries.Do you think it is an apparent conjunction as above?.Then what > is navamsha?First 3.2 degrees of any FIRY sign is always assigned to > Aries.Any planet placed within this degree span will relate to Aries > as navamsha.This is a tattwa based sambandha and does not represent > any placement.On the other hand Rashi chakra placement is an > astronomically measured value,adjusted for ayanamsha > correction.Distance/Conjunction in Rashi chakra -points towards > physical seperation/proximity while navamsha points towards > sambandhas.It has no connection with distance.Hope the difference is > clear this time. Dear Pradeep, Your exegesis contains lots of germane points and is hard to logically argue against. Excellent! +++ PS: Where did this thread emanate from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2006 Report Share Posted June 24, 2006 Bravo Pradeep, I think you are on to something really significant -- now said in words -- shabda and vakkyaas! Navmasha being the chart view of reality from the tattwic (essential) dimension makes sense! So rashi for the physical, navamsha from the essence, the spirit, as the 9th represents, -- kind of like what most of us really understood, hopefully! RR , "vijayadas_pradeep" <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Hari Namaste > > Take planets Mercury/Mars/Jupiter -placed in the first degree of > Aries,Mars/Sag respectively.They are physically,(OK lets say > relative/apparent) present within the boundaries of > Aries/Leo/Sag.Distance between Mars/Mercury is 120 degrees and > Mars/Jupiter is 240 degrees(Physical seperation).(Apparent need not > be a concern as ,we follow the SAME benchmark(w.r to earth) for all > Rashi Chakra placements). > > Now let us take Navamsha.All the three are drawn as conjunct in > Aries.Do you think it is an apparent conjunction as above?.Then what > is navamsha?First 3.2 degrees of any FIRY sign is always assigned to > Aries.Any planet placed within this degree span will relate to Aries > as navamsha.This is a tattwa based sambandha and does not represent > any placement.On the other hand Rashi chakra placement is an > astronomically measured value,adjusted for ayanamsha > correction.Distance/Conjunction in Rashi chakra -points towards > physical seperation/proximity while navamsha points towards > sambandhas.It has no connection with distance.Hope the difference is > clear this time. > > > |om| > Dear Pradeep, namaste > > M-W dictionary defines conjunction as given below: > > con·junc·tion > Function: noun > 1 : the act or an instance of conjoining : the state of being > conjoined : > 2 : occurrence together in time or space : > 3 a : the apparent meeting or passing of two or more celestial > bodies in the same degree of the zodiac b : a configuration in which > two celestial bodies have their least apparent separation > 4 : an uninflected linguistic form that joins together sentences, > clauses, phrases, or words > 5 : a complex sentence in logic true if and only if each of its > components is true > > Note meaning (3a) above. It says apparent and not PHYSICAL. > Physically conjunct is a non-reality. Thus when viewed against the > backdrop of the rasi, we say that two planets are conjunct when they > appear to be in the same rasi. This is apparent and not true in > reality. As pointed out earlier, rasi is also imaginary; it has no > physical boundaries in space. > > The point I am driving at is that when we say that two planets are > conjunct in a rasi purely on a non-physical basis (apparent), what > is wrong with defining similar conjunctions in vargas? > > Regarding varga (division) + uttama (best) = vargottama, M-W (Monier- > Williams) dictionary gives the following meanings for uttama: > > uppermost, highest, chief, most elevated, principal, best , > excellent RV. AV. AitBr. Mn. Pan5cat. &c. (often ifc. , e.g. % > {dvijo7ttama} , best of the twice-born i.e. a Bra1hman Mn.) first, > greatest, the highest (tone) the most removed or last in place or > order or time etc. > > best regards > Hari > 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.