Humility & learning lessons of life/Lakshmi ji

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi ji

 

Similar to the way you are having a student feeling towards

Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your knoweldge

and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am no man to

discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars like you.

 

I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and mother apart from

being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the other planets

have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have Paraspara

Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be formed.Also i have

seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever the mana takes

it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

If such be the case who is the only chethana that can give rise to

aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is ormless/thoughltess

etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti(which they are)

who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

 

Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is ofcourse

having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will sit on par

with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi likes eating

flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva shareera and

jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

 

Kindly share your views and correct.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

<b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>

> Om Gurave Namah

>

> Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

>

> First of all let me express how much I admire the sagacity with

> which you patiently field our endless queries/arguments. I

certainly

> wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can learn the

> same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting a lot from

> this thread and thank you for every thing.

>

> Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > deities into the discussion as their actions can be interpreted

in

> many

> > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and the Gods,

> including,

> > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for their ego. One

> finds

> > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma Purana, where

> Indra

> > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of Gods.

> > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> >

>

> Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were expressly

> mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first chapters of

> BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the Sage intended

> the students to understand his astrological treatise against this

> background. If we ignore this background and the exalted pace/tone

> it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of jyotish is

> incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason that Sanjay

ji

> also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

>

> Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra, he would have

> certainly done so himself, because it is not as though he was

> unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra is changing,

> whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great merit, he is

> eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject to

> insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of losing his

> position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

>

> Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu. That's

indeed

> most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was indeed tested

> among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and was

> apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it is Sage

Bhrigu

> who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured his ego by

> piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed illustrates

> the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to represent ego, then

> Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu, but those

eyes

> reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined intelligence,

> whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a drishti

which

> is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a disproportionate,

> larger than life impression.

>

> Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then Chandra be

> described as Kaami and

> > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the description of

> Satvik as

> > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we look at

their

> > strength then the principle that the strength of Grahas is

derived

> from

> > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva attributed to

> Chandra

> > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> behavior.Similarly

> > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence of a person

> its

> > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its being Pious.

>

> Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic tendencies, why is the

> abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship(shloka 32

in

> BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you interpreted, wouldn't

> the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be more likely to

be

> the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to allot a

pious,

> pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please tell me Sir,

> what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the temple …or the

> egoist king and the temple?

>

> If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient times and

> hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus as the

> priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is clearly not

> the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

>

> Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because it represents

> prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi, because it's

> full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the moon is

bright,

> it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east like the sun.

> When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a great benefic,

> why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's brilliant to the

> exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the compassion of the

> watery planets.

>

> Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born but once

born

> it comes under control

> > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way in Sanskrit

> Atma has

> > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are aware. On birth

> the

> > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you also know

that

> one

> > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides ignorance etc. So if

> Surya

> > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego. Or at least

> that is

> > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

>

> Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham aatma

> gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere statement of

> fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an egoistic

> assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II - Sankhya yoga from

> Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

>

> I also do not think that Parashara was talking about Aatma

> as "self", because "self" is a combination of soul+manah+body

> (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify significator

> for each separately.

>

> The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into being, and

> ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn, eternal, constant

and

> ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain. ....it is

> changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is pure and

always

> remains so.

>

> Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can animate the

> being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire world and

> witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected & above all! And,

I

> am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

>

> On the other hand, "change" is the name of the Ego...it can

appear,

> disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and diminish….every small

> thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and Ego be the

> one and same thing?

>

> Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as opposed to a

King.

> It is not for nothing he

> > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone to salute

him

> and

> > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say this is the

> height

> > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on par with god.

> >

>

> Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the appointed

> place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all that it

> signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining example, even

among

> mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human history is as

> replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it is of vile

> egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to a person

just

> because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have massive egos

> and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their praises, if

they

> can afford it:--))

>

> Is there any law that bars a king from being enlightened/detached

> and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way round? I think

> it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to people based

on

> their station in life. I really can't understand how Sun is

equated

> to ego... and just because he's the king of the planetary system!!

>

> Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and unambiguously

> stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

>

> Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of what

Parashara

> wanted to say and how

> > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava Manjari

does

> > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does Bhuvan

Deepak.

> >

> Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad that your

> statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a statement coming

> from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of character.

>

> Though I have nothing against other astrological texts, I

personally

> find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums, lacking the

> maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

>

> As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has multiple

> meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan" can also mean

> self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to be

> encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being obsequious

or

> groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a true humble

> person is a dignified person who can respect others in the same

way

> he respects himself…for then he sees no difference between himself

> and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

>

> Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail. Please pardon

> them and correct me.

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep ji,

 

Thank you for your kind and affectionate words. Let me hasten to add

that i am no great scholar, either in astrology or in theology, but

a student trying to cross the ocean of knowledge in the tiny boat of

my limited comprehension. Still, I will try to respond to your

queries to the best of my ability.

 

Pradeep: > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and mother

apart from

> being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the other

planets

> have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have Paraspara

> Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be formed.Also i have

> seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever the mana

takes

> it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> If such be the case who is the only chethana that can give rise to

> aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is ormless/thoughltess

> etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti(which they

are)

> who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

 

Lakshmi: That's a brilliant question. let me start answering this

question by means of a story which is familiar to all of us and is

topical right now:--))

 

We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know only the

Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists who is equally

responsible for our birth. It is necessary at this point because

without the sustenance given by mother, the body will not survive.

Ganesha also never knew his Father nor did he recognise him even

when Shiva himself revealed his identity, supported by other

deities.

 

People might say that Ganesha was totally fashioned by Parvati and

Shiva had no role in his genesis. There's a beautiful line in

Lalitha Sahasranaamam which goes "Kaameshwara mukhaaloka kalpita Sri

Ganeshwaraa" and it hints at the participation of Kameshwara as the

primary impulse in the creation of Ganesha. It's Shiva's impulse

that was routed through Parvati....like the we receive the Light of

the soul through the filters of Prakriti and think that they are one

and the same.

 

So, little Ganesha could not recognise his Father and obstructed

Him, with all his might. It's only when Shiva cut off his head, cut

off the vision rooted in prakriti (ignorance) that obstructed the

passage of Light, and replaced it with a head of gynana that ganesha

understood the true nature & stature of Shiva, the Soul.

 

Similarly we must sooner or later rid ourselves of the prejudices

and preoccupations, become more mature, rid ourselves of the filters

that our mind & body constantly erect...and allow the pure Light to

pass. From the yogic stand point the influence of manah continues

till "Sumana" and only "Unmanaa" is without the influence of the

mind and is the last post in the journey to Maha Bindu.

 

For attaining that state that the only way I know of is "Tapah" or

meditation. What advise was good enough for Srishti karta (Brahma)

must be good for us too:--)) When we are ready, the Aatma will

choose to reveal Itself to us, because there's no other way one can

get aatma gyana, as Yama told Nachiketa.

 

 

> Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is ofcourse

> having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will sit on par

> with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi likes

eating

> flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva shareera and

> jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

>

> Kindly share your views and correct.

>

 

Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that our body is

akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and uncontrollable

urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the ashtamurthi form

of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye namaH) is

linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body. To keep order in

this jungle, to elevate/protect the individual from these

animalistic/egoist tendencies, do we not need the Lion, the

Pashupati, the Narasimha to dwell deep in the heart-cave(chit-guha)

in this forest?

 

This Lion certainly eats flesh or the bodily/material/earthly

attachments!! Anyway, it is a known fact that a lion kills only to

satisfy its hunger. It's the swadharma of lion and can not be

faulted.

 

Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as are the

shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is termed

as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists. Soul does not

need to communicate. You must have seen yogis living in jungles and

in caves and hardly communicating with others. Don't they have some

thing of the lion in them? It's for this reason that when Sun is the

strongest planet in causing Parivraja yoga, the native is said to

become a tapaswi!! And, one of the names of the sun is "Hamsa"!!

 

They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita where the lord

talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person the Brahmin, the

dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

 

Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also contribute and

correct me.

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Lakshmi ji

>

> Similar to the way you are having a student feeling towards

> Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your knoweldge

> and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am no man to

> discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars like you.

>

> I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and mother apart

from

> being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the other

planets

> have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have Paraspara

> Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be formed.Also i have

> seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever the mana

takes

> it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> If such be the case who is the only chethana that can give rise to

> aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is ormless/thoughltess

> etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti(which they

are)

> who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

>

> Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is ofcourse

> having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will sit on par

> with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi likes

eating

> flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva shareera and

> jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

>

> Kindly share your views and correct.

>

> Thanks

> Pradeep

>

>

> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> >

> > Om Gurave Namah

> >

> > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> >

> > First of all let me express how much I admire the sagacity with

> > which you patiently field our endless queries/arguments. I

> certainly

> > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can learn the

> > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting a lot from

> > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> >

> > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > deities into the discussion as their actions can be

interpreted

> in

> > many

> > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and the Gods,

> > including,

> > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for their ego. One

> > finds

> > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma Purana, where

> > Indra

> > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of Gods.

> > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > >

> >

> > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were expressly

> > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first chapters

of

> > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the Sage

intended

> > the students to understand his astrological treatise against

this

> > background. If we ignore this background and the exalted

pace/tone

> > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of jyotish is

> > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason that

Sanjay

> ji

> > also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

> >

> > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra, he would

have

> > certainly done so himself, because it is not as though he was

> > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra is

changing,

> > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great merit, he

is

> > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject to

> > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of losing

his

> > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

> >

> > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu. That's

> indeed

> > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was indeed tested

> > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and was

> > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it is Sage

> Bhrigu

> > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured his ego

by

> > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed

illustrates

> > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to represent ego,

then

> > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu, but those

> eyes

> > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined intelligence,

> > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a drishti

> which

> > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a disproportionate,

> > larger than life impression.

> >

> > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then Chandra be

> > described as Kaami and

> > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the description of

> > Satvik as

> > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we look at

> their

> > > strength then the principle that the strength of Grahas is

> derived

> > from

> > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva attributed to

> > Chandra

> > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > behavior.Similarly

> > > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence of a

person

> > its

> > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its being Pious.

> >

> > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic tendencies, why is

the

> > abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship(shloka 32

> in

> > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you interpreted,

wouldn't

> > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be more likely

to

> be

> > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to allot a

> pious,

> > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please tell me

Sir,

> > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the temple …or the

> > egoist king and the temple?

> >

> > If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient times and

> > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus as the

> > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is clearly

not

> > the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

> >

> > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because it

represents

> > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi, because

it's

> > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the moon is

> bright,

> > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east like the sun.

> > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a great

benefic,

> > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's brilliant to the

> > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the compassion of the

> > watery planets.

> >

> > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born but once

> born

> > it comes under control

> > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way in

Sanskrit

> > Atma has

> > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are aware. On

birth

> > the

> > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you also know

> that

> > one

> > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides ignorance etc. So

if

> > Surya

> > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego. Or at least

> > that is

> > > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

> >

> > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham aatma

> > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere statement of

> > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an egoistic

> > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II - Sankhya yoga

from

> > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> >

> > I also do not think that Parashara was talking about Aatma

> > as "self", because "self" is a combination of soul+manah+body

> > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify

significator

> > for each separately.

> >

> > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into being,

and

> > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn, eternal, constant

> and

> > ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain. ....it is

> > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is pure and

> always

> > remains so.

> >

> > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can animate the

> > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire world and

> > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected & above all!

And,

> I

> > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> >

> > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the Ego...it can

> appear,

> > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and diminish….every

small

> > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and Ego be

the

> > one and same thing?

> >

> > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as opposed to a

> King.

> > It is not for nothing he

> > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone to salute

> him

> > and

> > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say this is

the

> > height

> > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on par with

god.

> > >

> >

> > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the appointed

> > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all that it

> > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining example, even

> among

> > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human history is

as

> > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it is of vile

> > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to a person

> just

> > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have massive

egos

> > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their praises, if

> they

> > can afford it:--))

> >

> > Is there any law that bars a king from being

enlightened/detached

> > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way round? I think

> > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to people

based

> on

> > their station in life. I really can't understand how Sun is

> equated

> > to ego... and just because he's the king of the planetary

system!!

> >

> > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and

unambiguously

> > stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

> >

> > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of what

> Parashara

> > wanted to say and how

> > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava Manjari

> does

> > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does Bhuvan

> Deepak.

> > >

> > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad that your

> > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a statement

coming

> > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of character.

> >

> > Though I have nothing against other astrological texts, I

> personally

> > find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums, lacking

the

> > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> >

> > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has multiple

> > meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan" can also

mean

> > self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to be

> > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being obsequious

> or

> > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a true humble

> > person is a dignified person who can respect others in the same

> way

> > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference between

himself

> > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> >

> > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail. Please

pardon

> > them and correct me.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

>

[Guest guest]

> We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know only the

> Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists who is equally

> responsible for our birth.

 

Dear Lakshmi ji

If my questions were able to open the floodgates of wisdom, already

within you ,i am happy.Pls call be my name without any formalities.

This is simply brilliant.I can no way disagree with you.You are

mentioning the existence of Ganesha stage(Jeevashareera/Jeevatma in

this example).In this context - Ganesha initially cannot say ''Me and

Siva'' are one and the same.Ganesha has to ''Realize'' his source or

Origin.As you have rightly taught- this is AtmaGyana.There is a goal

for the instrument called Jeevashareera.To reach our destination we

have to go on a journey.(Major disagreement with Bharatji).

 

Similar to, mind emerging out of Jeevatma,Maya is emerging from

Paramatma.One Guru from Kerala, of yesteryears in ,his Drashanamala

says -like a painter's imagination before the painting/creation,

Lord(Paramatma) imagines about the Prapancha.Thus i think the realms

of this imagination is Maya.May be thats why Shankara said Lord is

veiled by Maya.May be Moorthi Roopa of Maya is ''seen'' as Prapancha.

 

But the problem is - the moment we talk of Jeevashaeera there is no

free existence of Soul.Jeeva shareera is having a self feeling ignited

by Soul.Lakshmi ji isn't there a difference between ''HE'' and ''HIS

reflection''.Shankara said Jeevatma is like reflection and Paramatma

Sun.''Reflection of SUN'' and ''SUN'', are not one and the same -Sun

is not inside the Pond.So we may understand - ''I'' am, is because of

HIS Chaitanya.In that sense ''I'' do exist.

 

Thus we cannot equate - 'I ''(reflection) and ''HE''(SUN).But when

there remains nothing(Prakriti) for the 'I'(reflection) to exist, HE

alone remains.This is Atma Gyana as you have rightly said,again.

Hence for the same reason i feel ''Soorya''is the Karaka for Self as

far as a jataka is concerned (reflected soul in the medium called

prakriti -mind/body) and should not be equated with Paramatma or

Supreme Soul.

 

> Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that our body is

> akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and uncontrollable

> urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the ashtamurthi form

> of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye namaH) is

> linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body.

 

Pradeep:Totally agree.Many people project themselves, as free from

material desires and Kama,but mostly frauds.It is a tough job and

Jyotish is ofcourse a stepping stone for spiritual ascend.When

Menaka's can reverse the flow of energy in Viswamitra what about

common souls:-)). HE alone can help.I feel Devi bhava can help a man

while Siva Roopa, a lady,in these matters.Thus Pashupati the king

among Animals is needed for strength and guard.

 

> Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as are the

> shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is termed

> as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists.

 

Pradeep:This is also brilliant.Sun's strength is a must for Paurusha

Sidhi and Moons strength for Karya Sidhi.Paurusha sidhi at its height

may be a must for reaching ''Purusha or HIM'' and may be ladies are

good at ''Karya Sidhi'' :-)).Thus a Lions mind is must for

Parivarjya.But see there is a Paraspara Ashrayatwa mentioned in

classics.I agree that once mind is formed it is self creating(mercury)

and growing.But can SHE create if HE is not there.So later on though

HE is just watching,HIS unison is always with HER for all further

creations.

 

Paraspara ashrayatwa is the biggest hint/clue for me.How will Sun

gain strength from Moon?

 

AtmaManasoRithareytharashrayathwath SooryaChandramasorEkasya

BalawathawadItharasya Balasidhi Thadha cha Samhithayam.

 

Thus they have mutual dependence and if one among Soorya/Chandra is

strong the other graha will also have strength.

 

''Atma Sahedi Manasa Mana Indriyena...

Swarthena Chendriyagana krama evamesha

Yogoyameva Manasa Kimagamyamasthi

Yasmin Mano Vrajathi Tathra Gathoyamatma'' ithi

 

Atma goes with Mana ...Mana with indriyas....etc

If there is Yoga of mind what is not possible!!!!

Wherever Mind goes there goes Atma

 

Also

Rajanau Ravisheethagu

Thus Soorya and Chandra are Raja _ Why both of them are Raja as per

sage?as Chandrashekhar ji has asked:_)

 

Also Soorya has more Papatwa than Ksheena Chandra<Also intersting to

note is defintion of Ksheena chandra as opposed to Paksha Bala.

 

Amayam cha Chadurdashyam Ksheenachandro na sarvada - Thus only

Amavasya and chathurdashi chandras as Ksheena>

 

> They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

> difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita where the lord

> talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person the Brahmin, the

> dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

>

 

Pradeep:Only great souls can have samadrishti.

 

> Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also contribute and

> correct me.

 

Pradeep:Not at all.This is not an ''official'' compliment to get

compliment paid back with interst_),Your words are full of wisdom

coming from within,and is a treat indeed.Thanks a lot.

 

Pradeep

 

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

>

> , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Lakshmi ji

> >

> > Similar to the way you are having a student feeling towards

> > Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your knoweldge

> > and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am no man to

> > discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars like you.

> >

> > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and mother apart

> from

> > being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the other

> planets

> > have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have Paraspara

> > Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be formed.Also i have

> > seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever the mana

> takes

> > it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> > If such be the case who is the only chethana that can give rise to

> > aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is ormless/thoughltess

> > etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti(which they

> are)

> > who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

> >

> > Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is ofcourse

> > having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will sit on par

> > with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi likes

> eating

> > flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva shareera and

> > jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

> >

> > Kindly share your views and correct.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Om Gurave Namah

> > >

> > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > >

> > > First of all let me express how much I admire the sagacity with

> > > which you patiently field our endless queries/arguments. I

> > certainly

> > > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can learn the

> > > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting a lot from

> > > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> > >

> > > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > > deities into the discussion as their actions can be

> interpreted

> > in

> > > many

> > > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and the Gods,

> > > including,

> > > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for their ego. One

> > > finds

> > > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma Purana, where

> > > Indra

> > > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of Gods.

> > > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were expressly

> > > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first chapters

> of

> > > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the Sage

> intended

> > > the students to understand his astrological treatise against

> this

> > > background. If we ignore this background and the exalted

> pace/tone

> > > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of jyotish is

> > > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason that

> Sanjay

> > ji

> > > also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

> > >

> > > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra, he would

> have

> > > certainly done so himself, because it is not as though he was

> > > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra is

> changing,

> > > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great merit, he

> is

> > > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject to

> > > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of losing

> his

> > > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

> > >

> > > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu. That's

> > indeed

> > > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was indeed tested

> > > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and was

> > > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it is Sage

> > Bhrigu

> > > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured his ego

> by

> > > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed

> illustrates

> > > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to represent ego,

> then

> > > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu, but those

> > eyes

> > > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined intelligence,

> > > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a drishti

> > which

> > > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a disproportionate,

> > > larger than life impression.

> > >

> > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then Chandra be

> > > described as Kaami and

> > > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the description of

> > > Satvik as

> > > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we look at

> > their

> > > > strength then the principle that the strength of Grahas is

> > derived

> > > from

> > > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva attributed to

> > > Chandra

> > > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > > behavior.Similarly

> > > > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence of a

> person

> > > its

> > > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its being Pious.

> > >

> > > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic tendencies, why is

> the

> > > abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship(shloka 32

> > in

> > > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you interpreted,

> wouldn't

> > > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be more likely

> to

> > be

> > > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to allot a

> > pious,

> > > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please tell me

> Sir,

> > > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the temple …or the

> > > egoist king and the temple?

> > >

> > > If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient times and

> > > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus as the

> > > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is clearly

> not

> > > the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

> > >

> > > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because it

> represents

> > > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi, because

> it's

> > > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the moon is

> > bright,

> > > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east like the sun.

> > > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a great

> benefic,

> > > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's brilliant to the

> > > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the compassion of the

> > > watery planets.

> > >

> > > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born but once

> > born

> > > it comes under control

> > > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way in

> Sanskrit

> > > Atma has

> > > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are aware. On

> birth

> > > the

> > > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you also know

> > that

> > > one

> > > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides ignorance etc. So

> if

> > > Surya

> > > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego. Or at least

> > > that is

> > > > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

> > >

> > > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham aatma

> > > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere statement of

> > > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an egoistic

> > > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II - Sankhya yoga

> from

> > > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> > >

> > > I also do not think that Parashara was talking about Aatma

> > > as "self", because "self" is a combination of soul+manah+body

> > > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify

> significator

> > > for each separately.

> > >

> > > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into being,

> and

> > > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn, eternal, constant

> > and

> > > ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain. ....it is

> > > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is pure and

> > always

> > > remains so.

> > >

> > > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can animate the

> > > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> > > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire world and

> > > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected & above all!

> And,

> > I

> > > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> > >

> > > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the Ego...it can

> > appear,

> > > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and diminish….every

> small

> > > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and Ego be

> the

> > > one and same thing?

> > >

> > > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as opposed to a

> > King.

> > > It is not for nothing he

> > > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone to salute

> > him

> > > and

> > > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say this is

> the

> > > height

> > > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on par with

> god.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the appointed

> > > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all that it

> > > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining example, even

> > among

> > > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human history is

> as

> > > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it is of vile

> > > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to a person

> > just

> > > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have massive

> egos

> > > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their praises, if

> > they

> > > can afford it:--))

> > >

> > > Is there any law that bars a king from being

> enlightened/detached

> > > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way round? I think

> > > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to people

> based

> > on

> > > their station in life. I really can't understand how Sun is

> > equated

> > > to ego... and just because he's the king of the planetary

> system!!

> > >

> > > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and

> unambiguously

> > > stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

> > >

> > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of what

> > Parashara

> > > wanted to say and how

> > > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava Manjari

> > does

> > > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does Bhuvan

> > Deepak.

> > > >

> > > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad that your

> > > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a statement

> coming

> > > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of character.

> > >

> > > Though I have nothing against other astrological texts, I

> > personally

> > > find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums, lacking

> the

> > > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> > >

> > > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has multiple

> > > meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan" can also

> mean

> > > self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to be

> > > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being obsequious

> > or

> > > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a true humble

> > > person is a dignified person who can respect others in the same

> > way

> > > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference between

> himself

> > > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> > >

> > > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail. Please

> pardon

> > > them and correct me.

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Lakshmi

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi ji

 

Missed onething.

 

One quality of Simha rashi is ''GarvVadhika'' - showing High Pride or

Ego.Ofcourse the swakshethra of King should have this.

Saddam Hussain has unafflicted exalted Soorya showing high Pride.

 

Regds

Pradeep

 

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> > We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know only the

> > Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists who is equally

> > responsible for our birth.

>

> Dear Lakshmi ji

> If my questions were able to open the floodgates of wisdom, already

> within you ,i am happy.Pls call be my name without any formalities.

> This is simply brilliant.I can no way disagree with you.You are

> mentioning the existence of Ganesha stage(Jeevashareera/Jeevatma in

> this example).In this context - Ganesha initially cannot say ''Me and

> Siva'' are one and the same.Ganesha has to ''Realize'' his source or

> Origin.As you have rightly taught- this is AtmaGyana.There is a goal

> for the instrument called Jeevashareera.To reach our destination we

> have to go on a journey.(Major disagreement with Bharatji).

>

> Similar to, mind emerging out of Jeevatma,Maya is emerging from

> Paramatma.One Guru from Kerala, of yesteryears in ,his Drashanamala

> says -like a painter's imagination before the painting/creation,

> Lord(Paramatma) imagines about the Prapancha.Thus i think the realms

> of this imagination is Maya.May be thats why Shankara said Lord is

> veiled by Maya.May be Moorthi Roopa of Maya is ''seen'' as Prapancha.

>

> But the problem is - the moment we talk of Jeevashaeera there is no

> free existence of Soul.Jeeva shareera is having a self feeling ignited

> by Soul.Lakshmi ji isn't there a difference between ''HE'' and ''HIS

> reflection''.Shankara said Jeevatma is like reflection and Paramatma

> Sun.''Reflection of SUN'' and ''SUN'', are not one and the same -Sun

> is not inside the Pond.So we may understand - ''I'' am, is because of

> HIS Chaitanya.In that sense ''I'' do exist.

>

> Thus we cannot equate - 'I ''(reflection) and ''HE''(SUN).But when

> there remains nothing(Prakriti) for the 'I'(reflection) to exist, HE

> alone remains.This is Atma Gyana as you have rightly said,again.

> Hence for the same reason i feel ''Soorya''is the Karaka for Self as

> far as a jataka is concerned (reflected soul in the medium called

> prakriti -mind/body) and should not be equated with Paramatma or

> Supreme Soul.

>

> > Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that our body is

> > akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and uncontrollable

> > urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the ashtamurthi form

> > of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye namaH) is

> > linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body.

>

> Pradeep:Totally agree.Many people project themselves, as free from

> material desires and Kama,but mostly frauds.It is a tough job and

> Jyotish is ofcourse a stepping stone for spiritual ascend.When

> Menaka's can reverse the flow of energy in Viswamitra what about

> common souls:-)). HE alone can help.I feel Devi bhava can help a man

> while Siva Roopa, a lady,in these matters.Thus Pashupati the king

> among Animals is needed for strength and guard.

>

> > Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as are the

> > shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is termed

> > as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists.

>

> Pradeep:This is also brilliant.Sun's strength is a must for Paurusha

> Sidhi and Moons strength for Karya Sidhi.Paurusha sidhi at its height

> may be a must for reaching ''Purusha or HIM'' and may be ladies are

> good at ''Karya Sidhi'' :-)).Thus a Lions mind is must for

> Parivarjya.But see there is a Paraspara Ashrayatwa mentioned in

> classics.I agree that once mind is formed it is self creating(mercury)

> and growing.But can SHE create if HE is not there.So later on though

> HE is just watching,HIS unison is always with HER for all further

> creations.

>

> Paraspara ashrayatwa is the biggest hint/clue for me.How will Sun

> gain strength from Moon?

>

> AtmaManasoRithareytharashrayathwath SooryaChandramasorEkasya

> BalawathawadItharasya Balasidhi Thadha cha Samhithayam.

>

> Thus they have mutual dependence and if one among Soorya/Chandra is

> strong the other graha will also have strength.

>

> ''Atma Sahedi Manasa Mana Indriyena...

> Swarthena Chendriyagana krama evamesha

> Yogoyameva Manasa Kimagamyamasthi

> Yasmin Mano Vrajathi Tathra Gathoyamatma'' ithi

>

> Atma goes with Mana ...Mana with indriyas....etc

> If there is Yoga of mind what is not possible!!!!

> Wherever Mind goes there goes Atma

>

> Also

> Rajanau Ravisheethagu

> Thus Soorya and Chandra are Raja _ Why both of them are Raja as per

> sage?as Chandrashekhar ji has asked:_)

>

> Also Soorya has more Papatwa than Ksheena Chandra<Also intersting to

> note is defintion of Ksheena chandra as opposed to Paksha Bala.

>

> Amayam cha Chadurdashyam Ksheenachandro na sarvada - Thus only

> Amavasya and chathurdashi chandras as Ksheena>

>

> > They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

> > difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita where the lord

> > talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person the Brahmin, the

> > dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

> >

>

> Pradeep:Only great souls can have samadrishti.

>

> > Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also contribute and

> > correct me.

>

> Pradeep:Not at all.This is not an ''official'' compliment to get

> compliment paid back with interst_),Your words are full of wisdom

> coming from within,and is a treat indeed.Thanks a lot.

>

> Pradeep

>

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

> >

> > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > >

> > > Similar to the way you are having a student feeling towards

> > > Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your knoweldge

> > > and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am no man to

> > > discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars like you.

> > >

> > > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and mother apart

> > from

> > > being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the other

> > planets

> > > have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have Paraspara

> > > Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be formed.Also i have

> > > seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever the mana

> > takes

> > > it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> > > If such be the case who is the only chethana that can give rise to

> > > aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is ormless/thoughltess

> > > etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti(which they

> > are)

> > > who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

> > >

> > > Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is ofcourse

> > > having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will sit on par

> > > with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi likes

> > eating

> > > flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva shareera and

> > > jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

> > >

> > > Kindly share your views and correct.

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > >

> > > > First of all let me express how much I admire the sagacity with

> > > > which you patiently field our endless queries/arguments. I

> > > certainly

> > > > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can learn the

> > > > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting a lot from

> > > > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > > > deities into the discussion as their actions can be

> > interpreted

> > > in

> > > > many

> > > > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and the Gods,

> > > > including,

> > > > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for their ego. One

> > > > finds

> > > > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma Purana, where

> > > > Indra

> > > > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of Gods.

> > > > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were expressly

> > > > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first chapters

> > of

> > > > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the Sage

> > intended

> > > > the students to understand his astrological treatise against

> > this

> > > > background. If we ignore this background and the exalted

> > pace/tone

> > > > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of jyotish is

> > > > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason that

> > Sanjay

> > > ji

> > > > also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

> > > >

> > > > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra, he would

> > have

> > > > certainly done so himself, because it is not as though he was

> > > > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra is

> > changing,

> > > > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great merit, he

> > is

> > > > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject to

> > > > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of losing

> > his

> > > > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

> > > >

> > > > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu. That's

> > > indeed

> > > > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was indeed tested

> > > > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and was

> > > > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it is Sage

> > > Bhrigu

> > > > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured his ego

> > by

> > > > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed

> > illustrates

> > > > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to represent ego,

> > then

> > > > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu, but those

> > > eyes

> > > > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined intelligence,

> > > > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a drishti

> > > which

> > > > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a disproportionate,

> > > > larger than life impression.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then Chandra be

> > > > described as Kaami and

> > > > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the description of

> > > > Satvik as

> > > > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we look at

> > > their

> > > > > strength then the principle that the strength of Grahas is

> > > derived

> > > > from

> > > > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva attributed to

> > > > Chandra

> > > > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > > > behavior.Similarly

> > > > > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence of a

> > person

> > > > its

> > > > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its being Pious.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic tendencies, why is

> > the

> > > > abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship(shloka 32

> > > in

> > > > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you interpreted,

> > wouldn't

> > > > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be more likely

> > to

> > > be

> > > > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to allot a

> > > pious,

> > > > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please tell me

> > Sir,

> > > > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the temple …or the

> > > > egoist king and the temple?

> > > >

> > > > If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient times and

> > > > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus as the

> > > > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is clearly

> > not

> > > > the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

> > > >

> > > > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because it

> > represents

> > > > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi, because

> > it's

> > > > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the moon is

> > > bright,

> > > > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east like the sun.

> > > > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a great

> > benefic,

> > > > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's brilliant to the

> > > > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the compassion of the

> > > > watery planets.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born but once

> > > born

> > > > it comes under control

> > > > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way in

> > Sanskrit

> > > > Atma has

> > > > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are aware. On

> > birth

> > > > the

> > > > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you also know

> > > that

> > > > one

> > > > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides ignorance etc. So

> > if

> > > > Surya

> > > > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego. Or at least

> > > > that is

> > > > > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham aatma

> > > > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere statement of

> > > > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an egoistic

> > > > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II - Sankhya yoga

> > from

> > > > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> > > >

> > > > I also do not think that Parashara was talking about Aatma

> > > > as "self", because "self" is a combination of soul+manah+body

> > > > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify

> > significator

> > > > for each separately.

> > > >

> > > > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into being,

> > and

> > > > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn, eternal, constant

> > > and

> > > > ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain. ....it is

> > > > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is pure and

> > > always

> > > > remains so.

> > > >

> > > > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can animate the

> > > > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> > > > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire world and

> > > > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected & above all!

> > And,

> > > I

> > > > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> > > >

> > > > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the Ego...it can

> > > appear,

> > > > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and diminish….every

> > small

> > > > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and Ego be

> > the

> > > > one and same thing?

> > > >

> > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as opposed to a

> > > King.

> > > > It is not for nothing he

> > > > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone to salute

> > > him

> > > > and

> > > > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say this is

> > the

> > > > height

> > > > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on par with

> > god.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the appointed

> > > > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all that it

> > > > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining example, even

> > > among

> > > > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human history is

> > as

> > > > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it is of vile

> > > > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to a person

> > > just

> > > > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have massive

> > egos

> > > > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their praises, if

> > > they

> > > > can afford it:--))

> > > >

> > > > Is there any law that bars a king from being

> > enlightened/detached

> > > > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way round? I think

> > > > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to people

> > based

> > > on

> > > > their station in life. I really can't understand how Sun is

> > > equated

> > > > to ego... and just because he's the king of the planetary

> > system!!

> > > >

> > > > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and

> > unambiguously

> > > > stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

> > > >

> > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of what

> > > Parashara

> > > > wanted to say and how

> > > > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava Manjari

> > > does

> > > > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does Bhuvan

> > > Deepak.

> > > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad that your

> > > > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a statement

> > coming

> > > > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of character.

> > > >

> > > > Though I have nothing against other astrological texts, I

> > > personally

> > > > find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums, lacking

> > the

> > > > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> > > >

> > > > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has multiple

> > > > meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan" can also

> > mean

> > > > self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to be

> > > > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being obsequious

> > > or

> > > > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a true humble

> > > > person is a dignified person who can respect others in the same

> > > way

> > > > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference between

> > himself

> > > > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> > > >

> > > > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail. Please

> > pardon

> > > > them and correct me.

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep,

 

Regarding the term "garva" I would like to quote from Soubhagya

Bhaskara bhashyam of Lalitha Sahasranaamam. While explaining the

term "Garvitaa" Bhaskara Raaya says "garvo vishwa nirmaaNa

vishayiNii paraahantaa saasyasanjaataa...." meaning one who is aware

of his/her power/ability to create the world...Parahanta...The

Supreme Soul!!

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Lakshmi ji

>

> Missed onething.

>

> One quality of Simha rashi is ''GarvVadhika'' - showing High Pride

or

> Ego.Ofcourse the swakshethra of King should have this.

> Saddam Hussain has unafflicted exalted Soorya showing high Pride.

>

> Regds

> Pradeep

>

> , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > > We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know only the

> > > Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists who is

equally

> > > responsible for our birth.

> >

> > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > If my questions were able to open the floodgates of wisdom,

already

> > within you ,i am happy.Pls call be my name without any

formalities.

> > This is simply brilliant.I can no way disagree with you.You are

> > mentioning the existence of Ganesha stage(Jeevashareera/Jeevatma

in

> > this example).In this context - Ganesha initially cannot

say ''Me and

> > Siva'' are one and the same.Ganesha has to ''Realize'' his

source or

> > Origin.As you have rightly taught- this is AtmaGyana.There is a

goal

> > for the instrument called Jeevashareera.To reach our destination

we

> > have to go on a journey.(Major disagreement with Bharatji).

> >

> > Similar to, mind emerging out of Jeevatma,Maya is emerging from

> > Paramatma.One Guru from Kerala, of yesteryears in ,his

Drashanamala

> > says -like a painter's imagination before the painting/creation,

> > Lord(Paramatma) imagines about the Prapancha.Thus i think the

realms

> > of this imagination is Maya.May be thats why Shankara said Lord

is

> > veiled by Maya.May be Moorthi Roopa of Maya is ''seen'' as

Prapancha.

> >

> > But the problem is - the moment we talk of Jeevashaeera there is

no

> > free existence of Soul.Jeeva shareera is having a self feeling

ignited

> > by Soul.Lakshmi ji isn't there a difference between ''HE''

and ''HIS

> > reflection''.Shankara said Jeevatma is like reflection and

Paramatma

> > Sun.''Reflection of SUN'' and ''SUN'', are not one and the same -

Sun

> > is not inside the Pond.So we may understand - ''I'' am, is

because of

> > HIS Chaitanya.In that sense ''I'' do exist.

> >

> > Thus we cannot equate - 'I ''(reflection) and ''HE''(SUN).But

when

> > there remains nothing(Prakriti) for the 'I'(reflection) to

exist, HE

> > alone remains.This is Atma Gyana as you have rightly said,again.

> > Hence for the same reason i feel ''Soorya''is the Karaka for

Self as

> > far as a jataka is concerned (reflected soul in the medium called

> > prakriti -mind/body) and should not be equated with Paramatma or

> > Supreme Soul.

> >

> > > Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that our

body is

> > > akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and

uncontrollable

> > > urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the

ashtamurthi form

> > > of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye namaH)

is

> > > linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body.

> >

> > Pradeep:Totally agree.Many people project themselves, as free

from

> > material desires and Kama,but mostly frauds.It is a tough job and

> > Jyotish is ofcourse a stepping stone for spiritual ascend.When

> > Menaka's can reverse the flow of energy in Viswamitra what about

> > common souls:-)). HE alone can help.I feel Devi bhava can help a

man

> > while Siva Roopa, a lady,in these matters.Thus Pashupati the king

> > among Animals is needed for strength and guard.

> >

> > > Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as are the

> > > shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is termed

> > > as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists.

> >

> > Pradeep:This is also brilliant.Sun's strength is a must for

Paurusha

> > Sidhi and Moons strength for Karya Sidhi.Paurusha sidhi at its

height

> > may be a must for reaching ''Purusha or HIM'' and may be ladies

are

> > good at ''Karya Sidhi'' :-)).Thus a Lions mind is must for

> > Parivarjya.But see there is a Paraspara Ashrayatwa mentioned in

> > classics.I agree that once mind is formed it is self creating

(mercury)

> > and growing.But can SHE create if HE is not there.So later on

though

> > HE is just watching,HIS unison is always with HER for all further

> > creations.

> >

> > Paraspara ashrayatwa is the biggest hint/clue for me.How will

Sun

> > gain strength from Moon?

> >

> > AtmaManasoRithareytharashrayathwath SooryaChandramasorEkasya

> > BalawathawadItharasya Balasidhi Thadha cha Samhithayam.

> >

> > Thus they have mutual dependence and if one among Soorya/Chandra

is

> > strong the other graha will also have strength.

> >

> > ''Atma Sahedi Manasa Mana Indriyena...

> > Swarthena Chendriyagana krama evamesha

> > Yogoyameva Manasa Kimagamyamasthi

> > Yasmin Mano Vrajathi Tathra Gathoyamatma'' ithi

> >

> > Atma goes with Mana ...Mana with indriyas....etc

> > If there is Yoga of mind what is not possible!!!!

> > Wherever Mind goes there goes Atma

> >

> > Also

> > Rajanau Ravisheethagu

> > Thus Soorya and Chandra are Raja _ Why both of them are Raja as

per

> > sage?as Chandrashekhar ji has asked:_)

> >

> > Also Soorya has more Papatwa than Ksheena Chandra<Also

intersting to

> > note is defintion of Ksheena chandra as opposed to Paksha Bala.

> >

> > Amayam cha Chadurdashyam Ksheenachandro na sarvada - Thus only

> > Amavasya and chathurdashi chandras as Ksheena>

> >

> > > They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

> > > difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita where the

lord

> > > talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person the

Brahmin, the

> > > dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

> > >

> >

> > Pradeep:Only great souls can have samadrishti.

> >

> > > Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also contribute

and

> > > correct me.

> >

> > Pradeep:Not at all.This is not an ''official'' compliment to get

> > compliment paid back with interst_),Your words are full of wisdom

> > coming from within,and is a treat indeed.Thanks a lot.

> >

> > Pradeep

> >

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Lakshmi

> > >

> > >

> > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > >

> > > > Similar to the way you are having a student feeling towards

> > > > Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your

knoweldge

> > > > and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am no

man to

> > > > discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars like

you.

> > > >

> > > > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and mother

apart

> > > from

> > > > being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the other

> > > planets

> > > > have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have Paraspara

> > > > Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be formed.Also i

have

> > > > seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever the

mana

> > > takes

> > > > it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> > > > If such be the case who is the only chethana that can give

rise to

> > > > aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is

ormless/thoughltess

> > > > etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti(which

they

> > > are)

> > > > who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

> > > >

> > > > Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is

ofcourse

> > > > having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will sit

on par

> > > > with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi

likes

> > > eating

> > > > flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva

shareera and

> > > > jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

> > > >

> > > > Kindly share your views and correct.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > >

> > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > >

> > > > > First of all let me express how much I admire the sagacity

with

> > > > > which you patiently field our endless queries/arguments. I

> > > > certainly

> > > > > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can

learn the

> > > > > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting a

lot from

> > > > > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > > > > deities into the discussion as their actions can be

> > > interpreted

> > > > in

> > > > > many

> > > > > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and the

Gods,

> > > > > including,

> > > > > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for their

ego. One

> > > > > finds

> > > > > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma Purana,

where

> > > > > Indra

> > > > > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of Gods.

> > > > > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were

expressly

> > > > > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first

chapters

> > > of

> > > > > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the Sage

> > > intended

> > > > > the students to understand his astrological treatise

against

> > > this

> > > > > background. If we ignore this background and the exalted

> > > pace/tone

> > > > > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of jyotish

is

> > > > > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason that

> > > Sanjay

> > > > ji

> > > > > also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

> > > > >

> > > > > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra, he

would

> > > have

> > > > > certainly done so himself, because it is not as though he

was

> > > > > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra is

> > > changing,

> > > > > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great

merit, he

> > > is

> > > > > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject to

> > > > > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of

losing

> > > his

> > > > > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

> > > > >

> > > > > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu.

That's

> > > > indeed

> > > > > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was indeed

tested

> > > > > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and was

> > > > > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it is

Sage

> > > > Bhrigu

> > > > > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured his

ego

> > > by

> > > > > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed

> > > illustrates

> > > > > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to represent

ego,

> > > then

> > > > > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu, but

those

> > > > eyes

> > > > > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined

intelligence,

> > > > > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a

drishti

> > > > which

> > > > > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a

disproportionate,

> > > > > larger than life impression.

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then

Chandra be

> > > > > described as Kaami and

> > > > > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the

description of

> > > > > Satvik as

> > > > > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we look

at

> > > > their

> > > > > > strength then the principle that the strength of Grahas

is

> > > > derived

> > > > > from

> > > > > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva attributed

to

> > > > > Chandra

> > > > > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > > > > behavior.Similarly

> > > > > > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence of

a

> > > person

> > > > > its

> > > > > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its being

Pious.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic tendencies,

why is

> > > the

> > > > > abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship

(shloka 32

> > > > in

> > > > > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you interpreted,

> > > wouldn't

> > > > > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be more

likely

> > > to

> > > > be

> > > > > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to allot

a

> > > > pious,

> > > > > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please tell

me

> > > Sir,

> > > > > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the temple …

or the

> > > > > egoist king and the temple?

> > > > >

> > > > > If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient

times and

> > > > > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus as

the

> > > > > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is

clearly

> > > not

> > > > > the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

> > > > >

> > > > > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because it

> > > represents

> > > > > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi,

because

> > > it's

> > > > > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the moon

is

> > > > bright,

> > > > > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east like

the sun.

> > > > > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a great

> > > benefic,

> > > > > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's brilliant

to the

> > > > > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the compassion

of the

> > > > > watery planets.

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born but

once

> > > > born

> > > > > it comes under control

> > > > > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way in

> > > Sanskrit

> > > > > Atma has

> > > > > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are aware.

On

> > > birth

> > > > > the

> > > > > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you also

know

> > > > that

> > > > > one

> > > > > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides ignorance

etc. So

> > > if

> > > > > Surya

> > > > > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego. Or at

least

> > > > > that is

> > > > > > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham

aatma

> > > > > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere

statement of

> > > > > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an egoistic

> > > > > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II - Sankhya

yoga

> > > from

> > > > > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> > > > >

> > > > > I also do not think that Parashara was talking about Aatma

> > > > > as "self", because "self" is a combination of

soul+manah+body

> > > > > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify

> > > significator

> > > > > for each separately.

> > > > >

> > > > > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into

being,

> > > and

> > > > > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn, eternal,

constant

> > > > and

> > > > > ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain. ....it

is

> > > > > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is pure

and

> > > > always

> > > > > remains so.

> > > > >

> > > > > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can

animate the

> > > > > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> > > > > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire world

and

> > > > > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected & above

all!

> > > And,

> > > > I

> > > > > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> > > > >

> > > > > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the Ego...it

can

> > > > appear,

> > > > > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and

diminish….every

> > > small

> > > > > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and

Ego be

> > > the

> > > > > one and same thing?

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as opposed

to a

> > > > King.

> > > > > It is not for nothing he

> > > > > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone to

salute

> > > > him

> > > > > and

> > > > > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say this

is

> > > the

> > > > > height

> > > > > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on par

with

> > > god.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the

appointed

> > > > > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all

that it

> > > > > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining example,

even

> > > > among

> > > > > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human

history is

> > > as

> > > > > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it is

of vile

> > > > > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to a

person

> > > > just

> > > > > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have

massive

> > > egos

> > > > > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their

praises, if

> > > > they

> > > > > can afford it:--))

> > > > >

> > > > > Is there any law that bars a king from being

> > > enlightened/detached

> > > > > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way round? I

think

> > > > > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to

people

> > > based

> > > > on

> > > > > their station in life. I really can't understand how Sun

is

> > > > equated

> > > > > to ego... and just because he's the king of the planetary

> > > system!!

> > > > >

> > > > > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and

> > > unambiguously

> > > > > stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of what

> > > > Parashara

> > > > > wanted to say and how

> > > > > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava

Manjari

> > > > does

> > > > > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does

Bhuvan

> > > > Deepak.

> > > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad that

your

> > > > > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a

statement

> > > coming

> > > > > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of

character.

> > > > >

> > > > > Though I have nothing against other astrological texts, I

> > > > personally

> > > > > find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums,

lacking

> > > the

> > > > > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> > > > >

> > > > > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has

multiple

> > > > > meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan" can

also

> > > mean

> > > > > self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to be

> > > > > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being

obsequious

> > > > or

> > > > > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a true

humble

> > > > > person is a dignified person who can respect others in

the same

> > > > way

> > > > > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference between

> > > himself

> > > > > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail. Please

> > > pardon

> > > > > them and correct me.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi ji

 

Thanks for letting me know about the quotation and meaning.

Simha rashi and Garva vis-a-vis manushya jataka ,may not be equated

with Garva of creating wolrd is my humble opinion-)).

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

<b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>

> Om Gurave Namah

>

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> Regarding the term "garva" I would like to quote from Soubhagya

> Bhaskara bhashyam of Lalitha Sahasranaamam. While explaining the

> term "Garvitaa" Bhaskara Raaya says "garvo vishwa nirmaaNa

> vishayiNii paraahantaa saasyasanjaataa...." meaning one who is aware

> of his/her power/ability to create the world...Parahanta...The

> Supreme Soul!!

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Lakshmi ji

> >

> > Missed onething.

> >

> > One quality of Simha rashi is ''GarvVadhika'' - showing High Pride

> or

> > Ego.Ofcourse the swakshethra of King should have this.

> > Saddam Hussain has unafflicted exalted Soorya showing high Pride.

> >

> > Regds

> > Pradeep

> >

> > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > >

> > > > We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know only the

> > > > Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists who is

> equally

> > > > responsible for our birth.

> > >

> > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > If my questions were able to open the floodgates of wisdom,

> already

> > > within you ,i am happy.Pls call be my name without any

> formalities.

> > > This is simply brilliant.I can no way disagree with you.You are

> > > mentioning the existence of Ganesha stage(Jeevashareera/Jeevatma

> in

> > > this example).In this context - Ganesha initially cannot

> say ''Me and

> > > Siva'' are one and the same.Ganesha has to ''Realize'' his

> source or

> > > Origin.As you have rightly taught- this is AtmaGyana.There is a

> goal

> > > for the instrument called Jeevashareera.To reach our destination

> we

> > > have to go on a journey.(Major disagreement with Bharatji).

> > >

> > > Similar to, mind emerging out of Jeevatma,Maya is emerging from

> > > Paramatma.One Guru from Kerala, of yesteryears in ,his

> Drashanamala

> > > says -like a painter's imagination before the painting/creation,

> > > Lord(Paramatma) imagines about the Prapancha.Thus i think the

> realms

> > > of this imagination is Maya.May be thats why Shankara said Lord

> is

> > > veiled by Maya.May be Moorthi Roopa of Maya is ''seen'' as

> Prapancha.

> > >

> > > But the problem is - the moment we talk of Jeevashaeera there is

> no

> > > free existence of Soul.Jeeva shareera is having a self feeling

> ignited

> > > by Soul.Lakshmi ji isn't there a difference between ''HE''

> and ''HIS

> > > reflection''.Shankara said Jeevatma is like reflection and

> Paramatma

> > > Sun.''Reflection of SUN'' and ''SUN'', are not one and the same -

> Sun

> > > is not inside the Pond.So we may understand - ''I'' am, is

> because of

> > > HIS Chaitanya.In that sense ''I'' do exist.

> > >

> > > Thus we cannot equate - 'I ''(reflection) and ''HE''(SUN).But

> when

> > > there remains nothing(Prakriti) for the 'I'(reflection) to

> exist, HE

> > > alone remains.This is Atma Gyana as you have rightly said,again.

> > > Hence for the same reason i feel ''Soorya''is the Karaka for

> Self as

> > > far as a jataka is concerned (reflected soul in the medium called

> > > prakriti -mind/body) and should not be equated with Paramatma or

> > > Supreme Soul.

> > >

> > > > Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that our

> body is

> > > > akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and

> uncontrollable

> > > > urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the

> ashtamurthi form

> > > > of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye namaH)

> is

> > > > linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body.

> > >

> > > Pradeep:Totally agree.Many people project themselves, as free

> from

> > > material desires and Kama,but mostly frauds.It is a tough job and

> > > Jyotish is ofcourse a stepping stone for spiritual ascend.When

> > > Menaka's can reverse the flow of energy in Viswamitra what about

> > > common souls:-)). HE alone can help.I feel Devi bhava can help a

> man

> > > while Siva Roopa, a lady,in these matters.Thus Pashupati the king

> > > among Animals is needed for strength and guard.

> > >

> > > > Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as are the

> > > > shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is termed

> > > > as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists.

> > >

> > > Pradeep:This is also brilliant.Sun's strength is a must for

> Paurusha

> > > Sidhi and Moons strength for Karya Sidhi.Paurusha sidhi at its

> height

> > > may be a must for reaching ''Purusha or HIM'' and may be ladies

> are

> > > good at ''Karya Sidhi'' :-)).Thus a Lions mind is must for

> > > Parivarjya.But see there is a Paraspara Ashrayatwa mentioned in

> > > classics.I agree that once mind is formed it is self creating

> (mercury)

> > > and growing.But can SHE create if HE is not there.So later on

> though

> > > HE is just watching,HIS unison is always with HER for all further

> > > creations.

> > >

> > > Paraspara ashrayatwa is the biggest hint/clue for me.How will

> Sun

> > > gain strength from Moon?

> > >

> > > AtmaManasoRithareytharashrayathwath SooryaChandramasorEkasya

> > > BalawathawadItharasya Balasidhi Thadha cha Samhithayam.

> > >

> > > Thus they have mutual dependence and if one among Soorya/Chandra

> is

> > > strong the other graha will also have strength.

> > >

> > > ''Atma Sahedi Manasa Mana Indriyena...

> > > Swarthena Chendriyagana krama evamesha

> > > Yogoyameva Manasa Kimagamyamasthi

> > > Yasmin Mano Vrajathi Tathra Gathoyamatma'' ithi

> > >

> > > Atma goes with Mana ...Mana with indriyas....etc

> > > If there is Yoga of mind what is not possible!!!!

> > > Wherever Mind goes there goes Atma

> > >

> > > Also

> > > Rajanau Ravisheethagu

> > > Thus Soorya and Chandra are Raja _ Why both of them are Raja as

> per

> > > sage?as Chandrashekhar ji has asked:_)

> > >

> > > Also Soorya has more Papatwa than Ksheena Chandra<Also

> intersting to

> > > note is defintion of Ksheena chandra as opposed to Paksha Bala.

> > >

> > > Amayam cha Chadurdashyam Ksheenachandro na sarvada - Thus only

> > > Amavasya and chathurdashi chandras as Ksheena>

> > >

> > > > They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

> > > > difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita where the

> lord

> > > > talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person the

> Brahmin, the

> > > > dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Pradeep:Only great souls can have samadrishti.

> > >

> > > > Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also contribute

> and

> > > > correct me.

> > >

> > > Pradeep:Not at all.This is not an ''official'' compliment to get

> > > compliment paid back with interst_),Your words are full of wisdom

> > > coming from within,and is a treat indeed.Thanks a lot.

> > >

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > >

> > > > > Similar to the way you are having a student feeling towards

> > > > > Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your

> knoweldge

> > > > > and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am no

> man to

> > > > > discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars like

> you.

> > > > >

> > > > > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and mother

> apart

> > > > from

> > > > > being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the other

> > > > planets

> > > > > have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have Paraspara

> > > > > Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be formed.Also i

> have

> > > > > seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever the

> mana

> > > > takes

> > > > > it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> > > > > If such be the case who is the only chethana that can give

> rise to

> > > > > aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is

> ormless/thoughltess

> > > > > etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti(which

> they

> > > > are)

> > > > > who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is

> ofcourse

> > > > > having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will sit

> on par

> > > > > with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi

> likes

> > > > eating

> > > > > flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva

> shareera and

> > > > > jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

> > > > >

> > > > > Kindly share your views and correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > First of all let me express how much I admire the sagacity

> with

> > > > > > which you patiently field our endless queries/arguments. I

> > > > > certainly

> > > > > > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can

> learn the

> > > > > > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting a

> lot from

> > > > > > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > > > > > deities into the discussion as their actions can be

> > > > interpreted

> > > > > in

> > > > > > many

> > > > > > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and the

> Gods,

> > > > > > including,

> > > > > > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for their

> ego. One

> > > > > > finds

> > > > > > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma Purana,

> where

> > > > > > Indra

> > > > > > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of Gods.

> > > > > > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were

> expressly

> > > > > > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first

> chapters

> > > > of

> > > > > > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the Sage

> > > > intended

> > > > > > the students to understand his astrological treatise

> against

> > > > this

> > > > > > background. If we ignore this background and the exalted

> > > > pace/tone

> > > > > > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of jyotish

> is

> > > > > > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason that

> > > > Sanjay

> > > > > ji

> > > > > > also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra, he

> would

> > > > have

> > > > > > certainly done so himself, because it is not as though he

> was

> > > > > > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra is

> > > > changing,

> > > > > > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great

> merit, he

> > > > is

> > > > > > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject to

> > > > > > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of

> losing

> > > > his

> > > > > > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu.

> That's

> > > > > indeed

> > > > > > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was indeed

> tested

> > > > > > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and was

> > > > > > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it is

> Sage

> > > > > Bhrigu

> > > > > > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured his

> ego

> > > > by

> > > > > > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed

> > > > illustrates

> > > > > > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to represent

> ego,

> > > > then

> > > > > > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu, but

> those

> > > > > eyes

> > > > > > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined

> intelligence,

> > > > > > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a

> drishti

> > > > > which

> > > > > > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a

> disproportionate,

> > > > > > larger than life impression.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then

> Chandra be

> > > > > > described as Kaami and

> > > > > > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the

> description of

> > > > > > Satvik as

> > > > > > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we look

> at

> > > > > their

> > > > > > > strength then the principle that the strength of Grahas

> is

> > > > > derived

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva attributed

> to

> > > > > > Chandra

> > > > > > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > > > > > behavior.Similarly

> > > > > > > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence of

> a

> > > > person

> > > > > > its

> > > > > > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its being

> Pious.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic tendencies,

> why is

> > > > the

> > > > > > abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship

> (shloka 32

> > > > > in

> > > > > > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you interpreted,

> > > > wouldn't

> > > > > > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be more

> likely

> > > > to

> > > > > be

> > > > > > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to allot

> a

> > > > > pious,

> > > > > > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please tell

> me

> > > > Sir,

> > > > > > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the temple …

> or the

> > > > > > egoist king and the temple?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient

> times and

> > > > > > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus as

> the

> > > > > > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is

> clearly

> > > > not

> > > > > > the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because it

> > > > represents

> > > > > > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi,

> because

> > > > it's

> > > > > > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the moon

> is

> > > > > bright,

> > > > > > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east like

> the sun.

> > > > > > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a great

> > > > benefic,

> > > > > > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's brilliant

> to the

> > > > > > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the compassion

> of the

> > > > > > watery planets.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born but

> once

> > > > > born

> > > > > > it comes under control

> > > > > > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way in

> > > > Sanskrit

> > > > > > Atma has

> > > > > > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are aware.

> On

> > > > birth

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you also

> know

> > > > > that

> > > > > > one

> > > > > > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides ignorance

> etc. So

> > > > if

> > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego. Or at

> least

> > > > > > that is

> > > > > > > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham

> aatma

> > > > > > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere

> statement of

> > > > > > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an egoistic

> > > > > > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II - Sankhya

> yoga

> > > > from

> > > > > > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I also do not think that Parashara was talking about Aatma

> > > > > > as "self", because "self" is a combination of

> soul+manah+body

> > > > > > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify

> > > > significator

> > > > > > for each separately.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into

> being,

> > > > and

> > > > > > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn, eternal,

> constant

> > > > > and

> > > > > > ancient, it is not killed when the body is slain. ....it

> is

> > > > > > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is pure

> and

> > > > > always

> > > > > > remains so.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can

> animate the

> > > > > > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> > > > > > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire world

> and

> > > > > > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected & above

> all!

> > > > And,

> > > > > I

> > > > > > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the Ego...it

> can

> > > > > appear,

> > > > > > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and

> diminish….every

> > > > small

> > > > > > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and

> Ego be

> > > > the

> > > > > > one and same thing?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as opposed

> to a

> > > > > King.

> > > > > > It is not for nothing he

> > > > > > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone to

> salute

> > > > > him

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say this

> is

> > > > the

> > > > > > height

> > > > > > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on par

> with

> > > > god.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the

> appointed

> > > > > > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all

> that it

> > > > > > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining example,

> even

> > > > > among

> > > > > > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human

> history is

> > > > as

> > > > > > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it is

> of vile

> > > > > > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to a

> person

> > > > > just

> > > > > > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have

> massive

> > > > egos

> > > > > > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their

> praises, if

> > > > > they

> > > > > > can afford it:--))

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Is there any law that bars a king from being

> > > > enlightened/detached

> > > > > > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way round? I

> think

> > > > > > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to

> people

> > > > based

> > > > > on

> > > > > > their station in life. I really can't understand how Sun

> is

> > > > > equated

> > > > > > to ego... and just because he's the king of the planetary

> > > > system!!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and

> > > > unambiguously

> > > > > > stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of what

> > > > > Parashara

> > > > > > wanted to say and how

> > > > > > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava

> Manjari

> > > > > does

> > > > > > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does

> Bhuvan

> > > > > Deepak.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad that

> your

> > > > > > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a

> statement

> > > > coming

> > > > > > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of

> character.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Though I have nothing against other astrological texts, I

> > > > > personally

> > > > > > find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums,

> lacking

> > > > the

> > > > > > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has

> multiple

> > > > > > meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan" can

> also

> > > > mean

> > > > > > self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to be

> > > > > > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being

> obsequious

> > > > > or

> > > > > > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a true

> humble

> > > > > > person is a dignified person who can respect others in

> the same

> > > > > way

> > > > > > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference between

> > > > himself

> > > > > > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail. Please

> > > > pardon

> > > > > > them and correct me.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep,

 

I thought that you wanted to know about the "garva" of Lion as

significator of soul, hence quoted Bhaskara Raaya:--))

 

Translate Bhaskara Raaya's comment into mundane parlance, it would

imply the awareness (gynaana) and confidence of a person, in his

ability, to create/carve out a domain for himself anywhere, of which

he's the undisputed leader.

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Lakshmi ji

>

> Thanks for letting me know about the quotation and meaning.

> Simha rashi and Garva vis-a-vis manushya jataka ,may not be equated

> with Garva of creating wolrd is my humble opinion-)).

>

> Thanks

> Pradeep

>

>

> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> >

> > Om Gurave Namah

> >

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > Regarding the term "garva" I would like to quote from Soubhagya

> > Bhaskara bhashyam of Lalitha Sahasranaamam. While explaining the

> > term "Garvitaa" Bhaskara Raaya says "garvo vishwa nirmaaNa

> > vishayiNii paraahantaa saasyasanjaataa...." meaning one who is

aware

> > of his/her power/ability to create the world...Parahanta...The

> > Supreme Soul!!

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > >

> > > Missed onething.

> > >

> > > One quality of Simha rashi is ''GarvVadhika'' - showing High

Pride

> > or

> > > Ego.Ofcourse the swakshethra of King should have this.

> > > Saddam Hussain has unafflicted exalted Soorya showing high

Pride.

> > >

> > > Regds

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > > We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know only

the

> > > > > Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists who

is

> > equally

> > > > > responsible for our birth.

> > > >

> > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > If my questions were able to open the floodgates of wisdom,

> > already

> > > > within you ,i am happy.Pls call be my name without any

> > formalities.

> > > > This is simply brilliant.I can no way disagree with you.You

are

> > > > mentioning the existence of Ganesha stage

(Jeevashareera/Jeevatma

> > in

> > > > this example).In this context - Ganesha initially cannot

> > say ''Me and

> > > > Siva'' are one and the same.Ganesha has to ''Realize'' his

> > source or

> > > > Origin.As you have rightly taught- this is AtmaGyana.There

is a

> > goal

> > > > for the instrument called Jeevashareera.To reach our

destination

> > we

> > > > have to go on a journey.(Major disagreement with Bharatji).

> > > >

> > > > Similar to, mind emerging out of Jeevatma,Maya is emerging

from

> > > > Paramatma.One Guru from Kerala, of yesteryears in ,his

> > Drashanamala

> > > > says -like a painter's imagination before the

painting/creation,

> > > > Lord(Paramatma) imagines about the Prapancha.Thus i think

the

> > realms

> > > > of this imagination is Maya.May be thats why Shankara said

Lord

> > is

> > > > veiled by Maya.May be Moorthi Roopa of Maya is ''seen'' as

> > Prapancha.

> > > >

> > > > But the problem is - the moment we talk of Jeevashaeera

there is

> > no

> > > > free existence of Soul.Jeeva shareera is having a self

feeling

> > ignited

> > > > by Soul.Lakshmi ji isn't there a difference between ''HE''

> > and ''HIS

> > > > reflection''.Shankara said Jeevatma is like reflection and

> > Paramatma

> > > > Sun.''Reflection of SUN'' and ''SUN'', are not one and the

same -

> > Sun

> > > > is not inside the Pond.So we may understand - ''I'' am, is

> > because of

> > > > HIS Chaitanya.In that sense ''I'' do exist.

> > > >

> > > > Thus we cannot equate - 'I ''(reflection)

and ''HE''(SUN).But

> > when

> > > > there remains nothing(Prakriti) for the 'I'(reflection) to

> > exist, HE

> > > > alone remains.This is Atma Gyana as you have rightly

said,again.

> > > > Hence for the same reason i feel ''Soorya''is the Karaka for

> > Self as

> > > > far as a jataka is concerned (reflected soul in the medium

called

> > > > prakriti -mind/body) and should not be equated with

Paramatma or

> > > > Supreme Soul.

> > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that our

> > body is

> > > > > akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and

> > uncontrollable

> > > > > urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the

> > ashtamurthi form

> > > > > of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye

namaH)

> > is

> > > > > linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body.

> > > >

> > > > Pradeep:Totally agree.Many people project themselves, as

free

> > from

> > > > material desires and Kama,but mostly frauds.It is a tough

job and

> > > > Jyotish is ofcourse a stepping stone for spiritual

ascend.When

> > > > Menaka's can reverse the flow of energy in Viswamitra what

about

> > > > common souls:-)). HE alone can help.I feel Devi bhava can

help a

> > man

> > > > while Siva Roopa, a lady,in these matters.Thus Pashupati the

king

> > > > among Animals is needed for strength and guard.

> > > >

> > > > > Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as are

the

> > > > > shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is

termed

> > > > > as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists.

> > > >

> > > > Pradeep:This is also brilliant.Sun's strength is a must for

> > Paurusha

> > > > Sidhi and Moons strength for Karya Sidhi.Paurusha sidhi at

its

> > height

> > > > may be a must for reaching ''Purusha or HIM'' and may be

ladies

> > are

> > > > good at ''Karya Sidhi'' :-)).Thus a Lions mind is must for

> > > > Parivarjya.But see there is a Paraspara Ashrayatwa mentioned

in

> > > > classics.I agree that once mind is formed it is self creating

> > (mercury)

> > > > and growing.But can SHE create if HE is not there.So later

on

> > though

> > > > HE is just watching,HIS unison is always with HER for all

further

> > > > creations.

> > > >

> > > > Paraspara ashrayatwa is the biggest hint/clue for me.How

will

> > Sun

> > > > gain strength from Moon?

> > > >

> > > > AtmaManasoRithareytharashrayathwath SooryaChandramasorEkasya

> > > > BalawathawadItharasya Balasidhi Thadha cha Samhithayam.

> > > >

> > > > Thus they have mutual dependence and if one among

Soorya/Chandra

> > is

> > > > strong the other graha will also have strength.

> > > >

> > > > ''Atma Sahedi Manasa Mana Indriyena...

> > > > Swarthena Chendriyagana krama evamesha

> > > > Yogoyameva Manasa Kimagamyamasthi

> > > > Yasmin Mano Vrajathi Tathra Gathoyamatma'' ithi

> > > >

> > > > Atma goes with Mana ...Mana with indriyas....etc

> > > > If there is Yoga of mind what is not possible!!!!

> > > > Wherever Mind goes there goes Atma

> > > >

> > > > Also

> > > > Rajanau Ravisheethagu

> > > > Thus Soorya and Chandra are Raja _ Why both of them are Raja

as

> > per

> > > > sage?as Chandrashekhar ji has asked:_)

> > > >

> > > > Also Soorya has more Papatwa than Ksheena Chandra<Also

> > intersting to

> > > > note is defintion of Ksheena chandra as opposed to Paksha

Bala.

> > > >

> > > > Amayam cha Chadurdashyam Ksheenachandro na sarvada - Thus

only

> > > > Amavasya and chathurdashi chandras as Ksheena>

> > > >

> > > > > They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

> > > > > difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita where

the

> > lord

> > > > > talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person the

> > Brahmin, the

> > > > > dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Pradeep:Only great souls can have samadrishti.

> > > >

> > > > > Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also

contribute

> > and

> > > > > correct me.

> > > >

> > > > Pradeep:Not at all.This is not an ''official'' compliment to

get

> > > > compliment paid back with interst_),Your words are full of

wisdom

> > > > coming from within,and is a treat indeed.Thanks a lot.

> > > >

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Similar to the way you are having a student feeling

towards

> > > > > > Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your

> > knoweldge

> > > > > > and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am

no

> > man to

> > > > > > discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars

like

> > you.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and

mother

> > apart

> > > > > from

> > > > > > being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the

other

> > > > > planets

> > > > > > have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have

Paraspara

> > > > > > Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be

formed.Also i

> > have

> > > > > > seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever

the

> > mana

> > > > > takes

> > > > > > it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> > > > > > If such be the case who is the only chethana that can

give

> > rise to

> > > > > > aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is

> > ormless/thoughltess

> > > > > > etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti

(which

> > they

> > > > > are)

> > > > > > who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is

> > ofcourse

> > > > > > having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will

sit

> > on par

> > > > > > with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi

> > likes

> > > > > eating

> > > > > > flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva

> > shareera and

> > > > > > jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Kindly share your views and correct.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks

> > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > First of all let me express how much I admire the

sagacity

> > with

> > > > > > > which you patiently field our endless

queries/arguments. I

> > > > > > certainly

> > > > > > > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can

> > learn the

> > > > > > > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting

a

> > lot from

> > > > > > > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > > > > > > deities into the discussion as their actions can be

> > > > > interpreted

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > many

> > > > > > > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and

the

> > Gods,

> > > > > > > including,

> > > > > > > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for

their

> > ego. One

> > > > > > > finds

> > > > > > > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma

Purana,

> > where

> > > > > > > Indra

> > > > > > > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of

Gods.

> > > > > > > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were

> > expressly

> > > > > > > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first

> > chapters

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the

Sage

> > > > > intended

> > > > > > > the students to understand his astrological treatise

> > against

> > > > > this

> > > > > > > background. If we ignore this background and the

exalted

> > > > > pace/tone

> > > > > > > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of

jyotish

> > is

> > > > > > > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason

that

> > > > > Sanjay

> > > > > > ji

> > > > > > > also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra,

he

> > would

> > > > > have

> > > > > > > certainly done so himself, because it is not as though

he

> > was

> > > > > > > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra

is

> > > > > changing,

> > > > > > > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great

> > merit, he

> > > > > is

> > > > > > > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject

to

> > > > > > > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of

> > losing

> > > > > his

> > > > > > > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu.

> > That's

> > > > > > indeed

> > > > > > > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was

indeed

> > tested

> > > > > > > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and

was

> > > > > > > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it

is

> > Sage

> > > > > > Bhrigu

> > > > > > > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured

his

> > ego

> > > > > by

> > > > > > > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed

> > > > > illustrates

> > > > > > > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to

represent

> > ego,

> > > > > then

> > > > > > > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu,

but

> > those

> > > > > > eyes

> > > > > > > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined

> > intelligence,

> > > > > > > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a

> > drishti

> > > > > > which

> > > > > > > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a

> > disproportionate,

> > > > > > > larger than life impression.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then

> > Chandra be

> > > > > > > described as Kaami and

> > > > > > > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the

> > description of

> > > > > > > Satvik as

> > > > > > > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we

look

> > at

> > > > > > their

> > > > > > > > strength then the principle that the strength of

Grahas

> > is

> > > > > > derived

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva

attributed

> > to

> > > > > > > Chandra

> > > > > > > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > > > > > > behavior.Similarly

> > > > > > > > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence

of

> > a

> > > > > person

> > > > > > > its

> > > > > > > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its

being

> > Pious.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic

tendencies,

> > why is

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship

> > (shloka 32

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you

interpreted,

> > > > > wouldn't

> > > > > > > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be

more

> > likely

> > > > > to

> > > > > > be

> > > > > > > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to

allot

> > a

> > > > > > pious,

> > > > > > > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please

tell

> > me

> > > > > Sir,

> > > > > > > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the

temple …

> > or the

> > > > > > > egoist king and the temple?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient

> > times and

> > > > > > > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus

as

> > the

> > > > > > > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is

> > clearly

> > > > > not

> > > > > > > the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because

it

> > > > > represents

> > > > > > > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi,

> > because

> > > > > it's

> > > > > > > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the

moon

> > is

> > > > > > bright,

> > > > > > > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east

like

> > the sun.

> > > > > > > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a

great

> > > > > benefic,

> > > > > > > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's

brilliant

> > to the

> > > > > > > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the

compassion

> > of the

> > > > > > > watery planets.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born

but

> > once

> > > > > > born

> > > > > > > it comes under control

> > > > > > > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way

in

> > > > > Sanskrit

> > > > > > > Atma has

> > > > > > > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are

aware.

> > On

> > > > > birth

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you

also

> > know

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > one

> > > > > > > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides

ignorance

> > etc. So

> > > > > if

> > > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego.

Or at

> > least

> > > > > > > that is

> > > > > > > > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham

> > aatma

> > > > > > > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere

> > statement of

> > > > > > > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an

egoistic

> > > > > > > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II -

Sankhya

> > yoga

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I also do not think that Parashara was talking about

Aatma

> > > > > > > as "self", because "self" is a combination of

> > soul+manah+body

> > > > > > > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify

> > > > > significator

> > > > > > > for each separately.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into

> > being,

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn,

eternal,

> > constant

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > ancient, it is not killed when the body is

slain. ....it

> > is

> > > > > > > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is

pure

> > and

> > > > > > always

> > > > > > > remains so.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can

> > animate the

> > > > > > > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> > > > > > > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire

world

> > and

> > > > > > > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected &

above

> > all!

> > > > > And,

> > > > > > I

> > > > > > > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the

Ego...it

> > can

> > > > > > appear,

> > > > > > > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and

> > diminish….every

> > > > > small

> > > > > > > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and

> > Ego be

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > one and same thing?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as

opposed

> > to a

> > > > > > King.

> > > > > > > It is not for nothing he

> > > > > > > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone

to

> > salute

> > > > > > him

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say

this

> > is

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > height

> > > > > > > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on

par

> > with

> > > > > god.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the

> > appointed

> > > > > > > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all

> > that it

> > > > > > > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining

example,

> > even

> > > > > > among

> > > > > > > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human

> > history is

> > > > > as

> > > > > > > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it

is

> > of vile

> > > > > > > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to

a

> > person

> > > > > > just

> > > > > > > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have

> > massive

> > > > > egos

> > > > > > > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their

> > praises, if

> > > > > > they

> > > > > > > can afford it:--))

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Is there any law that bars a king from being

> > > > > enlightened/detached

> > > > > > > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way

round? I

> > think

> > > > > > > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to

> > people

> > > > > based

> > > > > > on

> > > > > > > their station in life. I really can't understand how

Sun

> > is

> > > > > > equated

> > > > > > > to ego... and just because he's the king of the

planetary

> > > > > system!!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and

> > > > > unambiguously

> > > > > > > stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of

what

> > > > > > Parashara

> > > > > > > wanted to say and how

> > > > > > > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava

> > Manjari

> > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does

> > Bhuvan

> > > > > > Deepak.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad

that

> > your

> > > > > > > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a

> > statement

> > > > > coming

> > > > > > > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of

> > character.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Though I have nothing against other astrological

texts, I

> > > > > > personally

> > > > > > > find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums,

> > lacking

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has

> > multiple

> > > > > > > meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan"

can

> > also

> > > > > mean

> > > > > > > self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to

be

> > > > > > > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being

> > obsequious

> > > > > > or

> > > > > > > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a

true

> > humble

> > > > > > > person is a dignified person who can respect others

in

> > the same

> > > > > > way

> > > > > > > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference

between

> > > > > himself

> > > > > > > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail.

Please

> > > > > pardon

> > > > > > > them and correct me.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi ji

 

Thanks again for migrating garva from higher level to mundane with

necassary modifications.I agree with you regarding this confidence.

But the problem arise if that ''garva at mundane level''starts

thinking -'' ónly me can do this''.This is not true!!.It is the same

Chaitanya that enlivens every jeevashareera.

 

Regds

Pradeep

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

<b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>

> Om Gurave Namah

>

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> I thought that you wanted to know about the "garva" of Lion as

> significator of soul, hence quoted Bhaskara Raaya:--))

>

> Translate Bhaskara Raaya's comment into mundane parlance, it would

> imply the awareness (gynaana) and confidence of a person, in his

> ability, to create/carve out a domain for himself anywhere, of which

> he's the undisputed leader.

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

>

> , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Lakshmi ji

> >

> > Thanks for letting me know about the quotation and meaning.

> > Simha rashi and Garva vis-a-vis manushya jataka ,may not be equated

> > with Garva of creating wolrd is my humble opinion-)).

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Om Gurave Namah

> > >

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > Regarding the term "garva" I would like to quote from Soubhagya

> > > Bhaskara bhashyam of Lalitha Sahasranaamam. While explaining the

> > > term "Garvitaa" Bhaskara Raaya says "garvo vishwa nirmaaNa

> > > vishayiNii paraahantaa saasyasanjaataa...." meaning one who is

> aware

> > > of his/her power/ability to create the world...Parahanta...The

> > > Supreme Soul!!

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Lakshmi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > >

> > > > Missed onething.

> > > >

> > > > One quality of Simha rashi is ''GarvVadhika'' - showing High

> Pride

> > > or

> > > > Ego.Ofcourse the swakshethra of King should have this.

> > > > Saddam Hussain has unafflicted exalted Soorya showing high

> Pride.

> > > >

> > > > Regds

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > > We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know only

> the

> > > > > > Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists who

> is

> > > equally

> > > > > > responsible for our birth.

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > > If my questions were able to open the floodgates of wisdom,

> > > already

> > > > > within you ,i am happy.Pls call be my name without any

> > > formalities.

> > > > > This is simply brilliant.I can no way disagree with you.You

> are

> > > > > mentioning the existence of Ganesha stage

> (Jeevashareera/Jeevatma

> > > in

> > > > > this example).In this context - Ganesha initially cannot

> > > say ''Me and

> > > > > Siva'' are one and the same.Ganesha has to ''Realize'' his

> > > source or

> > > > > Origin.As you have rightly taught- this is AtmaGyana.There

> is a

> > > goal

> > > > > for the instrument called Jeevashareera.To reach our

> destination

> > > we

> > > > > have to go on a journey.(Major disagreement with Bharatji).

> > > > >

> > > > > Similar to, mind emerging out of Jeevatma,Maya is emerging

> from

> > > > > Paramatma.One Guru from Kerala, of yesteryears in ,his

> > > Drashanamala

> > > > > says -like a painter's imagination before the

> painting/creation,

> > > > > Lord(Paramatma) imagines about the Prapancha.Thus i think

> the

> > > realms

> > > > > of this imagination is Maya.May be thats why Shankara said

> Lord

> > > is

> > > > > veiled by Maya.May be Moorthi Roopa of Maya is ''seen'' as

> > > Prapancha.

> > > > >

> > > > > But the problem is - the moment we talk of Jeevashaeera

> there is

> > > no

> > > > > free existence of Soul.Jeeva shareera is having a self

> feeling

> > > ignited

> > > > > by Soul.Lakshmi ji isn't there a difference between ''HE''

> > > and ''HIS

> > > > > reflection''.Shankara said Jeevatma is like reflection and

> > > Paramatma

> > > > > Sun.''Reflection of SUN'' and ''SUN'', are not one and the

> same -

> > > Sun

> > > > > is not inside the Pond.So we may understand - ''I'' am, is

> > > because of

> > > > > HIS Chaitanya.In that sense ''I'' do exist.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thus we cannot equate - 'I ''(reflection)

> and ''HE''(SUN).But

> > > when

> > > > > there remains nothing(Prakriti) for the 'I'(reflection) to

> > > exist, HE

> > > > > alone remains.This is Atma Gyana as you have rightly

> said,again.

> > > > > Hence for the same reason i feel ''Soorya''is the Karaka for

> > > Self as

> > > > > far as a jataka is concerned (reflected soul in the medium

> called

> > > > > prakriti -mind/body) and should not be equated with

> Paramatma or

> > > > > Supreme Soul.

> > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that our

> > > body is

> > > > > > akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and

> > > uncontrollable

> > > > > > urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the

> > > ashtamurthi form

> > > > > > of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye

> namaH)

> > > is

> > > > > > linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body.

> > > > >

> > > > > Pradeep:Totally agree.Many people project themselves, as

> free

> > > from

> > > > > material desires and Kama,but mostly frauds.It is a tough

> job and

> > > > > Jyotish is ofcourse a stepping stone for spiritual

> ascend.When

> > > > > Menaka's can reverse the flow of energy in Viswamitra what

> about

> > > > > common souls:-)). HE alone can help.I feel Devi bhava can

> help a

> > > man

> > > > > while Siva Roopa, a lady,in these matters.Thus Pashupati the

> king

> > > > > among Animals is needed for strength and guard.

> > > > >

> > > > > > Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as are

> the

> > > > > > shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is

> termed

> > > > > > as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists.

> > > > >

> > > > > Pradeep:This is also brilliant.Sun's strength is a must for

> > > Paurusha

> > > > > Sidhi and Moons strength for Karya Sidhi.Paurusha sidhi at

> its

> > > height

> > > > > may be a must for reaching ''Purusha or HIM'' and may be

> ladies

> > > are

> > > > > good at ''Karya Sidhi'' :-)).Thus a Lions mind is must for

> > > > > Parivarjya.But see there is a Paraspara Ashrayatwa mentioned

> in

> > > > > classics.I agree that once mind is formed it is self creating

> > > (mercury)

> > > > > and growing.But can SHE create if HE is not there.So later

> on

> > > though

> > > > > HE is just watching,HIS unison is always with HER for all

> further

> > > > > creations.

> > > > >

> > > > > Paraspara ashrayatwa is the biggest hint/clue for me.How

> will

> > > Sun

> > > > > gain strength from Moon?

> > > > >

> > > > > AtmaManasoRithareytharashrayathwath SooryaChandramasorEkasya

> > > > > BalawathawadItharasya Balasidhi Thadha cha Samhithayam.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thus they have mutual dependence and if one among

> Soorya/Chandra

> > > is

> > > > > strong the other graha will also have strength.

> > > > >

> > > > > ''Atma Sahedi Manasa Mana Indriyena...

> > > > > Swarthena Chendriyagana krama evamesha

> > > > > Yogoyameva Manasa Kimagamyamasthi

> > > > > Yasmin Mano Vrajathi Tathra Gathoyamatma'' ithi

> > > > >

> > > > > Atma goes with Mana ...Mana with indriyas....etc

> > > > > If there is Yoga of mind what is not possible!!!!

> > > > > Wherever Mind goes there goes Atma

> > > > >

> > > > > Also

> > > > > Rajanau Ravisheethagu

> > > > > Thus Soorya and Chandra are Raja _ Why both of them are Raja

> as

> > > per

> > > > > sage?as Chandrashekhar ji has asked:_)

> > > > >

> > > > > Also Soorya has more Papatwa than Ksheena Chandra<Also

> > > intersting to

> > > > > note is defintion of Ksheena chandra as opposed to Paksha

> Bala.

> > > > >

> > > > > Amayam cha Chadurdashyam Ksheenachandro na sarvada - Thus

> only

> > > > > Amavasya and chathurdashi chandras as Ksheena>

> > > > >

> > > > > > They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

> > > > > > difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita where

> the

> > > lord

> > > > > > talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person the

> > > Brahmin, the

> > > > > > dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Pradeep:Only great souls can have samadrishti.

> > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also

> contribute

> > > and

> > > > > > correct me.

> > > > >

> > > > > Pradeep:Not at all.This is not an ''official'' compliment to

> get

> > > > > compliment paid back with interst_),Your words are full of

> wisdom

> > > > > coming from within,and is a treat indeed.Thanks a lot.

> > > > >

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Similar to the way you are having a student feeling

> towards

> > > > > > > Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering your

> > > knoweldge

> > > > > > > and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct me.I am

> no

> > > man to

> > > > > > > discuss these topics,especially with well read scholars

> like

> > > you.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and

> mother

> > > apart

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All the

> other

> > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have

> Paraspara

> > > > > > > Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be

> formed.Also i

> > > have

> > > > > > > seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going wherever

> the

> > > mana

> > > > > > takes

> > > > > > > it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> > > > > > > If such be the case who is the only chethana that can

> give

> > > rise to

> > > > > > > aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is

> > > ormless/thoughltess

> > > > > > > etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti

> (which

> > > they

> > > > > > are)

> > > > > > > who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw light.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is LION.Lion is

> > > ofcourse

> > > > > > > having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King will

> sit

> > > on par

> > > > > > > with others and will have elevated position.Simha rashi

> > > likes

> > > > > > eating

> > > > > > > flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in jeeva

> > > shareera and

> > > > > > > jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Kindly share your views and correct.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Thanks

> > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > First of all let me express how much I admire the

> sagacity

> > > with

> > > > > > > > which you patiently field our endless

> queries/arguments. I

> > > > > > > certainly

> > > > > > > > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I can

> > > learn the

> > > > > > > > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly benefitting

> a

> > > lot from

> > > > > > > > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > > > > > > > deities into the discussion as their actions can be

> > > > > > interpreted

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > many

> > > > > > > > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi and

> the

> > > Gods,

> > > > > > > > including,

> > > > > > > > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for

> their

> > > ego. One

> > > > > > > > finds

> > > > > > > > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma

> Purana,

> > > where

> > > > > > > > Indra

> > > > > > > > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King of

> Gods.

> > > > > > > > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who were

> > > expressly

> > > > > > > > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very first

> > > chapters

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that the

> Sage

> > > > > > intended

> > > > > > > > the students to understand his astrological treatise

> > > against

> > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > background. If we ignore this background and the

> exalted

> > > > > > pace/tone

> > > > > > > > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of

> jyotish

> > > is

> > > > > > > > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this reason

> that

> > > > > > Sanjay

> > > > > > > ji

> > > > > > > > also insists on mandatory reading of these chapters.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to Indra,

> he

> > > would

> > > > > > have

> > > > > > > > certainly done so himself, because it is not as though

> he

> > > was

> > > > > > > > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because Indra

> is

> > > > > > changing,

> > > > > > > > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires great

> > > merit, he

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever subject

> to

> > > > > > > > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is afraid of

> > > losing

> > > > > > his

> > > > > > > > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is constant.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of Bhrigu.

> > > That's

> > > > > > > indeed

> > > > > > > > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was

> indeed

> > > tested

> > > > > > > > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik and

> was

> > > > > > > > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said, it

> is

> > > Sage

> > > > > > > Bhrigu

> > > > > > > > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu punctured

> his

> > > ego

> > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story indeed

> > > > > > illustrates

> > > > > > > > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to

> represent

> > > ego,

> > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of Bhrigu,

> but

> > > those

> > > > > > > eyes

> > > > > > > > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined

> > > intelligence,

> > > > > > > > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a perspective, a

> > > drishti

> > > > > > > which

> > > > > > > > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a

> > > disproportionate,

> > > > > > > > larger than life impression.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would then

> > > Chandra be

> > > > > > > > described as Kaami and

> > > > > > > > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the

> > > description of

> > > > > > > > Satvik as

> > > > > > > > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if we

> look

> > > at

> > > > > > > their

> > > > > > > > > strength then the principle that the strength of

> Grahas

> > > is

> > > > > > > derived

> > > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva

> attributed

> > > to

> > > > > > > > Chandra

> > > > > > > > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > > > > > > > behavior.Similarly

> > > > > > > > > strength of Sun being related to the self confidence

> of

> > > a

> > > > > > person

> > > > > > > > its

> > > > > > > > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not its

> being

> > > Pious.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic

> tendencies,

> > > why is

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > abode of sun given as temple and all places of worship

> > > (shloka 32

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you

> interpreted,

> > > > > > wouldn't

> > > > > > > > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be

> more

> > > likely

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish to

> allot

> > > a

> > > > > > > pious,

> > > > > > > > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun? Please

> tell

> > > me

> > > > > > Sir,

> > > > > > > > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the

> temple …

> > > or the

> > > > > > > > egoist king and the temple?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > If you feel that temples were power centres in ancient

> > > times and

> > > > > > > > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then Jupiter/venus

> as

> > > the

> > > > > > > > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which is

> > > clearly

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > the case…so this particular angle stands dismissed.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas because

> it

> > > > > > represents

> > > > > > > > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a paapi,

> > > because

> > > > > > it's

> > > > > > > > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When the

> moon

> > > is

> > > > > > > bright,

> > > > > > > > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east

> like

> > > the sun.

> > > > > > > > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a

> great

> > > > > > benefic,

> > > > > > > > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's

> brilliant

> > > to the

> > > > > > > > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the

> compassion

> > > of the

> > > > > > > > watery planets.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is born

> but

> > > once

> > > > > > > born

> > > > > > > > it comes under control

> > > > > > > > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the way

> in

> > > > > > Sanskrit

> > > > > > > > Atma has

> > > > > > > > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are

> aware.

> > > On

> > > > > > birth

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure you

> also

> > > know

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > one

> > > > > > > > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides

> ignorance

> > > etc. So

> > > > > > if

> > > > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives ego.

> Or at

> > > least

> > > > > > > > that is

> > > > > > > > > how I would look at the interpretation of the words.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita says "aham

> > > aatma

> > > > > > > > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a mere

> > > statement of

> > > > > > > > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an

> egoistic

> > > > > > > > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II -

> Sankhya

> > > yoga

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I also do not think that Parashara was talking about

> Aatma

> > > > > > > > as "self", because "self" is a combination of

> > > soul+manah+body

> > > > > > > > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to specify

> > > > > > significator

> > > > > > > > for each separately.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming into

> > > being,

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn,

> eternal,

> > > constant

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > ancient, it is not killed when the body is

> slain. ....it

> > > is

> > > > > > > > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition, is

> pure

> > > and

> > > > > > > always

> > > > > > > > remains so.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma can

> > > animate the

> > > > > > > > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet remain

> > > > > > > > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire

> world

> > > and

> > > > > > > > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected &

> above

> > > all!

> > > > > > And,

> > > > > > > I

> > > > > > > > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the

> Ego...it

> > > can

> > > > > > > appear,

> > > > > > > > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and

> > > diminish….every

> > > > > > small

> > > > > > > > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul and

> > > Ego be

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > one and same thing?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as

> opposed

> > > to a

> > > > > > > King.

> > > > > > > > It is not for nothing he

> > > > > > > > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects everyone

> to

> > > salute

> > > > > > > him

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would say

> this

> > > is

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > height

> > > > > > > > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be on

> par

> > > with

> > > > > > god.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's the

> > > appointed

> > > > > > > > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and all

> > > that it

> > > > > > > > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining

> example,

> > > even

> > > > > > > among

> > > > > > > > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example. Human

> > > history is

> > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as it

> is

> > > of vile

> > > > > > > > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to impute "ego" to

> a

> > > person

> > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may have

> > > massive

> > > > > > egos

> > > > > > > > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing their

> > > praises, if

> > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > can afford it:--))

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Is there any law that bars a king from being

> > > > > > enlightened/detached

> > > > > > > > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way

> round? I

> > > think

> > > > > > > > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities to

> > > people

> > > > > > based

> > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > their station in life. I really can't understand how

> Sun

> > > is

> > > > > > > equated

> > > > > > > > to ego... and just because he's the king of the

> planetary

> > > > > > system!!

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly and

> > > > > > unambiguously

> > > > > > > > stated and instead look for convoluted interpretations?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation of

> what

> > > > > > > Parashara

> > > > > > > > wanted to say and how

> > > > > > > > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that Bhava

> > > Manjari

> > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so does

> > > Bhuvan

> > > > > > > Deepak.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am glad

> that

> > > your

> > > > > > > > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a

> > > statement

> > > > > > coming

> > > > > > > > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of

> > > character.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Though I have nothing against other astrological

> texts, I

> > > > > > > personally

> > > > > > > > find many of them with their pithy and catchy dictums,

> > > lacking

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word has

> > > multiple

> > > > > > > > meanings, and from my view point the word "Abhimaan"

> can

> > > also

> > > > > > mean

> > > > > > > > self-respect, which is a positive quality and needs to

> be

> > > > > > > > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean being

> > > obsequious

> > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking a

> true

> > > humble

> > > > > > > > person is a dignified person who can respect others

> in

> > > the same

> > > > > > > way

> > > > > > > > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference

> between

> > > > > > himself

> > > > > > > > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long mail.

> Please

> > > > > > pardon

> > > > > > > > them and correct me.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep,

 

We have been discussing the basic karakatwa of planets so far. if

there are afflictions to the planet, it might lead to a aberrated

manifestation of the primary quality. But to treat an aberration as

a normal signification is incorrect.

 

If rahu, whom i consider to be the karaka for maya/ego, afflicts

Sun, without any other redeeming influences, "the confidence" might

manifest as ahamkaara. We all know about aditya, chandra and guru

chandala yogas, and their results, don't we?

 

Light passed through blue glass throws out blue colour, light

reflected through red glass throws out red colour...yet is that the

colour of the light or of the glass? The chaitanya is certainly the

same but the reflecting media are different, so the manifestations

are bound to be different.

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

 

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Lakshmi ji

>

> Thanks again for migrating garva from higher level to mundane with

> necassary modifications.I agree with you regarding this confidence.

> But the problem arise if that ''garva at mundane level''starts

> thinking -'' ónly me can do this''.This is not true!!.It is the

same

> Chaitanya that enlivens every jeevashareera.

>

> Regds

> Pradeep

> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> >

> > Om Gurave Namah

> >

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > I thought that you wanted to know about the "garva" of Lion as

> > significator of soul, hence quoted Bhaskara Raaya:--))

> >

> > Translate Bhaskara Raaya's comment into mundane parlance, it

would

> > imply the awareness (gynaana) and confidence of a person, in his

> > ability, to create/carve out a domain for himself anywhere, of

which

> > he's the undisputed leader.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

> >

> > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > >

> > > Thanks for letting me know about the quotation and meaning.

> > > Simha rashi and Garva vis-a-vis manushya jataka ,may not be

equated

> > > with Garva of creating wolrd is my humble opinion-)).

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > Regarding the term "garva" I would like to quote from

Soubhagya

> > > > Bhaskara bhashyam of Lalitha Sahasranaamam. While explaining

the

> > > > term "Garvitaa" Bhaskara Raaya says "garvo vishwa nirmaaNa

> > > > vishayiNii paraahantaa saasyasanjaataa...." meaning one who

is

> > aware

> > > > of his/her power/ability to create the

world...Parahanta...The

> > > > Supreme Soul!!

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > >

> > > > > Missed onething.

> > > > >

> > > > > One quality of Simha rashi is ''GarvVadhika'' - showing

High

> > Pride

> > > > or

> > > > > Ego.Ofcourse the swakshethra of King should have this.

> > > > > Saddam Hussain has unafflicted exalted Soorya showing high

> > Pride.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regds

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > We are all like Ganeshas when we are born. We know

only

> > the

> > > > > > > Mother/Prakriti and have no idea that a Father exists

who

> > is

> > > > equally

> > > > > > > responsible for our birth.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > > > If my questions were able to open the floodgates of

wisdom,

> > > > already

> > > > > > within you ,i am happy.Pls call be my name without any

> > > > formalities.

> > > > > > This is simply brilliant.I can no way disagree with

you.You

> > are

> > > > > > mentioning the existence of Ganesha stage

> > (Jeevashareera/Jeevatma

> > > > in

> > > > > > this example).In this context - Ganesha initially cannot

> > > > say ''Me and

> > > > > > Siva'' are one and the same.Ganesha has to ''Realize''

his

> > > > source or

> > > > > > Origin.As you have rightly taught- this is

AtmaGyana.There

> > is a

> > > > goal

> > > > > > for the instrument called Jeevashareera.To reach our

> > destination

> > > > we

> > > > > > have to go on a journey.(Major disagreement with

Bharatji).

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Similar to, mind emerging out of Jeevatma,Maya is

emerging

> > from

> > > > > > Paramatma.One Guru from Kerala, of yesteryears in ,his

> > > > Drashanamala

> > > > > > says -like a painter's imagination before the

> > painting/creation,

> > > > > > Lord(Paramatma) imagines about the Prapancha.Thus i

think

> > the

> > > > realms

> > > > > > of this imagination is Maya.May be thats why Shankara

said

> > Lord

> > > > is

> > > > > > veiled by Maya.May be Moorthi Roopa of Maya is ''seen''

as

> > > > Prapancha.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But the problem is - the moment we talk of Jeevashaeera

> > there is

> > > > no

> > > > > > free existence of Soul.Jeeva shareera is having a self

> > feeling

> > > > ignited

> > > > > > by Soul.Lakshmi ji isn't there a difference

between ''HE''

> > > > and ''HIS

> > > > > > reflection''.Shankara said Jeevatma is like reflection

and

> > > > Paramatma

> > > > > > Sun.''Reflection of SUN'' and ''SUN'', are not one and

the

> > same -

> > > > Sun

> > > > > > is not inside the Pond.So we may understand - ''I'' am,

is

> > > > because of

> > > > > > HIS Chaitanya.In that sense ''I'' do exist.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thus we cannot equate - 'I ''(reflection)

> > and ''HE''(SUN).But

> > > > when

> > > > > > there remains nothing(Prakriti) for the 'I'(reflection)

to

> > > > exist, HE

> > > > > > alone remains.This is Atma Gyana as you have rightly

> > said,again.

> > > > > > Hence for the same reason i feel ''Soorya''is the Karaka

for

> > > > Self as

> > > > > > far as a jataka is concerned (reflected soul in the

medium

> > called

> > > > > > prakriti -mind/body) and should not be equated with

> > Paramatma or

> > > > > > Supreme Soul.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: I am sure that you have read in classics that

our

> > > > body is

> > > > > > > akin to an inaccessible jungle, with its rampant and

> > > > uncontrollable

> > > > > > > urges, needs, dangerous desires etc. That's why the

> > > > ashtamurthi form

> > > > > > > of Shiva as Pashupati (Pashupataye yajamaana murthaye

> > namaH)

> > > > is

> > > > > > > linked to Yajamaana/kshetrajna/soul in the body.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pradeep:Totally agree.Many people project themselves, as

> > free

> > > > from

> > > > > > material desires and Kama,but mostly frauds.It is a

tough

> > job and

> > > > > > Jyotish is ofcourse a stepping stone for spiritual

> > ascend.When

> > > > > > Menaka's can reverse the flow of energy in Viswamitra

what

> > about

> > > > > > common souls:-)). HE alone can help.I feel Devi bhava

can

> > help a

> > > > man

> > > > > > while Siva Roopa, a lady,in these matters.Thus Pashupati

the

> > king

> > > > > > among Animals is needed for strength and guard.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > Pradeep ji, communication is a need born of manah, as

are

> > the

> > > > > > > shadripus etc (Mercury is the son of Chandra). Soul is

> > termed

> > > > > > > as "Ekaki", because it is alone and it alone exists.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pradeep:This is also brilliant.Sun's strength is a must

for

> > > > Paurusha

> > > > > > Sidhi and Moons strength for Karya Sidhi.Paurusha sidhi

at

> > its

> > > > height

> > > > > > may be a must for reaching ''Purusha or HIM'' and may be

> > ladies

> > > > are

> > > > > > good at ''Karya Sidhi'' :-)).Thus a Lions mind is must

for

> > > > > > Parivarjya.But see there is a Paraspara Ashrayatwa

mentioned

> > in

> > > > > > classics.I agree that once mind is formed it is self

creating

> > > > (mercury)

> > > > > > and growing.But can SHE create if HE is not there.So

later

> > on

> > > > though

> > > > > > HE is just watching,HIS unison is always with HER for

all

> > further

> > > > > > creations.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Paraspara ashrayatwa is the biggest hint/clue for me.How

> > will

> > > > Sun

> > > > > > gain strength from Moon?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > AtmaManasoRithareytharashrayathwath

SooryaChandramasorEkasya

> > > > > > BalawathawadItharasya Balasidhi Thadha cha Samhithayam.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thus they have mutual dependence and if one among

> > Soorya/Chandra

> > > > is

> > > > > > strong the other graha will also have strength.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ''Atma Sahedi Manasa Mana Indriyena...

> > > > > > Swarthena Chendriyagana krama evamesha

> > > > > > Yogoyameva Manasa Kimagamyamasthi

> > > > > > Yasmin Mano Vrajathi Tathra Gathoyamatma'' ithi

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Atma goes with Mana ...Mana with indriyas....etc

> > > > > > If there is Yoga of mind what is not possible!!!!

> > > > > > Wherever Mind goes there goes Atma

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Also

> > > > > > Rajanau Ravisheethagu

> > > > > > Thus Soorya and Chandra are Raja _ Why both of them are

Raja

> > as

> > > > per

> > > > > > sage?as Chandrashekhar ji has asked:_)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Also Soorya has more Papatwa than Ksheena Chandra<Also

> > > > intersting to

> > > > > > note is defintion of Ksheena chandra as opposed to

Paksha

> > Bala.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Amayam cha Chadurdashyam Ksheenachandro na sarvada -

Thus

> > only

> > > > > > Amavasya and chathurdashi chandras as Ksheena>

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > They also eat flesh, because for them there's no

> > > > > > > difference….remember that shloka from Bhagavadgita

where

> > the

> > > > lord

> > > > > > > talks of samadrishti…that for an enlightened person

the

> > > > Brahmin, the

> > > > > > > dog and the man who eats the dog are all the same.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pradeep:Only great souls can have samadrishti.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > Thanks for the nice questions. I hope others also

> > contribute

> > > > and

> > > > > > > correct me.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pradeep:Not at all.This is not an ''official''

compliment to

> > get

> > > > > > compliment paid back with interst_),Your words are full

of

> > wisdom

> > > > > > coming from within,and is a treat indeed.Thanks a lot.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Similar to the way you are having a student feeling

> > towards

> > > > > > > > Chandrashaekhar ji,i am approaching you,considering

your

> > > > knoweldge

> > > > > > > > and authority,in scriptural texts.Kindly correct

me.I am

> > no

> > > > man to

> > > > > > > > discuss these topics,especially with well read

scholars

> > like

> > > > you.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I feel Sun and Moon can be considerd as father and

> > mother

> > > > apart

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > being King and Queen,in the planetary cabinet.All

the

> > other

> > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > have to take ''birth'' from them.Sun and Moon have

> > Paraspara

> > > > > > > > Ashryathvam.Without this a ''bhava'' cannot be

> > formed.Also i

> > > > have

> > > > > > > > seen classical pramanas stating ''Atma going

wherever

> > the

> > > > mana

> > > > > > > takes

> > > > > > > > it'' w.r to Jeeva Shareera.

> > > > > > > > If such be the case who is the only chethana that

can

> > give

> > > > rise to

> > > > > > > > aham feeling?Ofcourse in a detached void HE is

> > > > ormless/thoughltess

> > > > > > > > etc.In a jeeva shaeera,if body and mind are prakriti

> > (which

> > > > they

> > > > > > > are)

> > > > > > > > who else can ignite this 'I' feeling.Kindly throw

light.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Sun is having swakshethra in Simha which is

LION.Lion is

> > > > ofcourse

> > > > > > > > having pride and not samabhavana.Similarly no King

will

> > sit

> > > > on par

> > > > > > > > with others and will have elevated position.Simha

rashi

> > > > likes

> > > > > > > eating

> > > > > > > > flesh and living in forests ,hills ,caves.So in

jeeva

> > > > shareera and

> > > > > > > > jataka do we have a modified version of Sun.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Kindly share your views and correct.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Thanks

> > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > First of all let me express how much I admire the

> > sagacity

> > > > with

> > > > > > > > > which you patiently field our endless

> > queries/arguments. I

> > > > > > > > certainly

> > > > > > > > > wish I had that quality, so please bless me that I

can

> > > > learn the

> > > > > > > > > same from you one day:--)) I am certainly

benefitting

> > a

> > > > lot from

> > > > > > > > > this thread and thank you for every thing.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: As I said let us not bring the

> > > > > > > > > > deities into the discussion as their actions can

be

> > > > > > > interpreted

> > > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > many

> > > > > > > > > > ways. If you remember the story of Bhrigu rishi

and

> > the

> > > > Gods,

> > > > > > > > > including,

> > > > > > > > > > Vishnu you will find him punishing the gods for

> > their

> > > > ego. One

> > > > > > > > > finds

> > > > > > > > > > similar story about Durvasa and Indra, in Padma

> > Purana,

> > > > where

> > > > > > > > > Indra

> > > > > > > > > > exhibited the highest form of ego and he is King

of

> > Gods.

> > > > > > > > > > But let us keep it a separate issue.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I only brought in the deities who

were

> > > > expressly

> > > > > > > > > mentioned by Parashara in BPHS. Infact, the very

first

> > > > chapters

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > BPHS deal with these divinities and I feel that

the

> > Sage

> > > > > > > intended

> > > > > > > > > the students to understand his astrological

treatise

> > > > against

> > > > > > > this

> > > > > > > > > background. If we ignore this background and the

> > exalted

> > > > > > > pace/tone

> > > > > > > > > it sets, I sincerely feel that our knowledge of

> > jyotish

> > > > is

> > > > > > > > > incomplete / flawed. I am sure it's for this

reason

> > that

> > > > > > > Sanjay

> > > > > > > > ji

> > > > > > > > > also insists on mandatory reading of these

chapters.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Anyway, if Parashara wanted to compare Sun to

Indra,

> > he

> > > > would

> > > > > > > have

> > > > > > > > > certainly done so himself, because it is not as

though

> > he

> > > > was

> > > > > > > > > unaware of Indra. He had not done that because

Indra

> > is

> > > > > > > changing,

> > > > > > > > > whereas Sun is unchanging. If a person acquires

great

> > > > merit, he

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > eligible to become Indra, so Indra is forever

subject

> > to

> > > > > > > > > insecurities of the terrestrial kings and is

afraid of

> > > > losing

> > > > > > > his

> > > > > > > > > position. It's never the case with Sun. He is

constant.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Secondly, thanks for bringing in the topic of

Bhrigu.

> > > > That's

> > > > > > > > indeed

> > > > > > > > > most appropriate to this argument. Lord Vishnu was

> > indeed

> > > > tested

> > > > > > > > > among others, but was found to be totally saattwik

and

> > was

> > > > > > > > > apportioned havirbhaga. Contrary to what you said,

it

> > is

> > > > Sage

> > > > > > > > Bhrigu

> > > > > > > > > who was found to be egoistic and Lord Vishnu

punctured

> > his

> > > > ego

> > > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > > piercing the eye in the Sage's foot. This story

indeed

> > > > > > > illustrates

> > > > > > > > > the nature of ego wonderfully. If Sun were to

> > represent

> > > > ego,

> > > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > > Lord should have pierced the regular eyes of

Bhrigu,

> > but

> > > > those

> > > > > > > > eyes

> > > > > > > > > reflect the sage's steady, balanced & illumined

> > > > intelligence,

> > > > > > > > > whereas the eye in the foot indicated a

perspective, a

> > > > drishti

> > > > > > > > which

> > > > > > > > > is shifting, unsteady, lopsided and conveys a

> > > > disproportionate,

> > > > > > > > > larger than life impression.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But think about it why would

then

> > > > Chandra be

> > > > > > > > > described as Kaami and

> > > > > > > > > > Surya as Paapa? This does not fit in with the

> > > > description of

> > > > > > > > > Satvik as

> > > > > > > > > > in pious but does with satva as strength. But if

we

> > look

> > > > at

> > > > > > > > their

> > > > > > > > > > strength then the principle that the strength of

> > Grahas

> > > > is

> > > > > > > > derived

> > > > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > strength of Moon does indicate that the satva

> > attributed

> > > > to

> > > > > > > > > Chandra

> > > > > > > > > > could relate to its strength as opposed to pious

> > > > > > > > > behavior.Similarly

> > > > > > > > > > strength of Sun being related to the self

confidence

> > of

> > > > a

> > > > > > > person

> > > > > > > > > its

> > > > > > > > > > strength is also relevant for a chart and not

its

> > being

> > > > Pious.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: If Sun were indeed related malefic

> > tendencies,

> > > > why is

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > abode of sun given as temple and all places of

worship

> > > > (shloka 32

> > > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > BPHS)? If Sun is only the cruel King as you

> > interpreted,

> > > > > > > wouldn't

> > > > > > > > > the Palace, the Royal court or the battle field be

> > more

> > > > likely

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > the abode of Sun? Was the venerable Sage foolish

to

> > allot

> > > > a

> > > > > > > > pious,

> > > > > > > > > pure place like the temple to the egoist Sun?

Please

> > tell

> > > > me

> > > > > > > Sir,

> > > > > > > > > what is more compatible…the saattwik soul and the

> > temple …

> > > > or the

> > > > > > > > > egoist king and the temple?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > If you feel that temples were power centres in

ancient

> > > > times and

> > > > > > > > > hence Sun was allotted the temples, then

Jupiter/venus

> > as

> > > > the

> > > > > > > > > priests would be more powerful than the Sun, which

is

> > > > clearly

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > the case…so this particular angle stands

dismissed.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Moon is subject to changes/the play of gunas

because

> > it

> > > > > > > represents

> > > > > > > > > prakriti. A bright moon is never considered a

paapi,

> > > > because

> > > > > > > it's

> > > > > > > > > full of light at that time...like the Sun. When

the

> > moon

> > > > is

> > > > > > > > bright,

> > > > > > > > > it gives out light like the Sun, rises in the east

> > like

> > > > the sun.

> > > > > > > > > When a Moon which is like the Sun is cinsidered a

> > great

> > > > > > > benefic,

> > > > > > > > > why is Sun considered krura? It's because he's

> > brilliant

> > > > to the

> > > > > > > > > exclusion of the others and perhaps lacks the

> > compassion

> > > > of the

> > > > > > > > > watery planets.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > talk of pure Atma till it is

born

> > but

> > > > once

> > > > > > > > born

> > > > > > > > > it comes under control

> > > > > > > > > > of Mana and no longer remains unsullied. By the

way

> > in

> > > > > > > Sanskrit

> > > > > > > > > Atma has

> > > > > > > > > > many meanings besides soul, as I am sure you are

> > aware.

> > > > On

> > > > > > > birth

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > atma gets the feeling o f Ahamkar and I am sure

you

> > also

> > > > know

> > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > one

> > > > > > > > > > of the meaning of Ahamkar is egoism besides

> > ignorance

> > > > etc. So

> > > > > > > if

> > > > > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > > > is the sarvatmaa then he is the one who gives

ego.

> > Or at

> > > > least

> > > > > > > > > that is

> > > > > > > > > > how I would look at the interpretation of the

words.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, Lord Krishna in Bhagavadgita

says "aham

> > > > aatma

> > > > > > > > > gudakesa sarvabhuta-ashayasthitah" …which is a

mere

> > > > statement of

> > > > > > > > > fact like "sarvaatma cha divaanathaH" and not an

> > egoistic

> > > > > > > > > assertion. I again quote from the Chapter II -

> > Sankhya

> > > > yoga

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > Bhagavad gita, about the nature of Aatma.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I also do not think that Parashara was talking

about

> > Aatma

> > > > > > > > > as "self", because "self" is a combination of

> > > > soul+manah+body

> > > > > > > > > (lagna), while the muni was careful enough to

specify

> > > > > > > significator

> > > > > > > > > for each separately.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The aatma is neither born nor does it die. Coming

into

> > > > being,

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn,

> > eternal,

> > > > constant

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > ancient, it is not killed when the body is

> > slain. ....it

> > > > is

> > > > > > > > > changeless and invulnerable. Atma, by definition,

is

> > pure

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > always

> > > > > > > > > remains so.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Further on, the Gita also talks of how the aatma

can

> > > > animate the

> > > > > > > > > being, be a witness to all its actions and yet

remain

> > > > > > > > > untouched....like the Sun, who animates the entire

> > world

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > witnesses everything and yet remains unaffected &

> > above

> > > > all!

> > > > > > > And,

> > > > > > > > I

> > > > > > > > > am only talking of Sun the planet, please.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > On the other hand, "change" is the name of the

> > Ego...it

> > > > can

> > > > > > > > appear,

> > > > > > > > > disappear, grow to gigantic proportions and

> > > > diminish….every

> > > > > > > small

> > > > > > > > > thing appallingly affects it. How can can the Soul

and

> > > > Ego be

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > one and same thing?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > I would not give humility as

> > opposed

> > > > to a

> > > > > > > > King.

> > > > > > > > > It is not for nothing he

> > > > > > > > > > sits on a throne, wears a crown and expects

everyone

> > to

> > > > salute

> > > > > > > > him

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > also worship him as an amsha of Vishnu. I would

say

> > this

> > > > is

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > height

> > > > > > > > > > of ego for a human being, to think himself to be

on

> > par

> > > > with

> > > > > > > god.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: One can sit on the throne, because that's

the

> > > > appointed

> > > > > > > > > place for him to sit, yet not get swayed by it and

all

> > > > that it

> > > > > > > > > signifies. You have Janaka Rajarshi as a shining

> > example,

> > > > even

> > > > > > > > among

> > > > > > > > > mortals. King Akbar is a more recent example.

Human

> > > > history is

> > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > > replete with the legends of humble humane kings as

it

> > is

> > > > of vile

> > > > > > > > > egoistic kings. I think it's unfair to

impute "ego" to

> > a

> > > > person

> > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > because he happens to be king!! Even beggars may

have

> > > > massive

> > > > > > > egos

> > > > > > > > > and may not be averse to engage bhats to sing

their

> > > > praises, if

> > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > can afford it:--))

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Is there any law that bars a king from being

> > > > > > > enlightened/detached

> > > > > > > > > and a beggar from being egoistic or the other way

> > round? I

> > > > think

> > > > > > > > > it's incorrect/inconclusive to arrogate qualities

to

> > > > people

> > > > > > > based

> > > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > > their station in life. I really can't understand

how

> > Sun

> > > > is

> > > > > > > > equated

> > > > > > > > > to ego... and just because he's the king of the

> > planetary

> > > > > > > system!!

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Anyway, why ignore what Parashara had so clearly

and

> > > > > > > unambiguously

> > > > > > > > > stated and instead look for convoluted

interpretations?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji: > But leaving the interpretation

of

> > what

> > > > > > > > Parashara

> > > > > > > > > wanted to say and how

> > > > > > > > > > scriptures are to be interpreted, we find that

Bhava

> > > > Manjari

> > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > attribute Abhimana (pride/ego) to Surya and so

does

> > > > Bhuvan

> > > > > > > > Deepak.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Thank you for your clarification. I am

glad

> > that

> > > > your

> > > > > > > > > statement is not quoted from BPHS, because such a

> > > > statement

> > > > > > > coming

> > > > > > > > > from Parashara would be very inconsistent & out of

> > > > character.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Though I have nothing against other astrological

> > texts, I

> > > > > > > > personally

> > > > > > > > > find many of them with their pithy and catchy

dictums,

> > > > lacking

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > maturity and ethical depth of BPHS.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > As you have correctly observed, a Sanskrit word

has

> > > > multiple

> > > > > > > > > meanings, and from my view point the

word "Abhimaan"

> > can

> > > > also

> > > > > > > mean

> > > > > > > > > self-respect, which is a positive quality and

needs to

> > be

> > > > > > > > > encouraged/cultivated. Humbleness does not mean

being

> > > > obsequious

> > > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > groveling at some one else's feet. In my thinking

a

> > true

> > > > humble

> > > > > > > > > person is a dignified person who can respect

others

> > in

> > > > the same

> > > > > > > > way

> > > > > > > > > he respects himself…for then he sees no difference

> > between

> > > > > > > himself

> > > > > > > > > and others, and sees Narayana everywhere.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Sir, I may have made many mistakes in my long

mail.

> > Please

> > > > > > > pardon

> > > > > > > > > them and correct me.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Sundeep ji,

 

If the

> > Sun does represent the pure and unalloyed soul in the chart

(pure

> > i.e. WITHOUT additional attributes (caused by entering a human

body)

> > lumped in), then why is there a concept of Charakarakatwa at

all, at

Ø > least for the Atma?

 

Ø How can the chara atmakarakatwa move to some

> > other graha for some people, and what then does Sun's chara

> > karakatwa in those charts represent (bearing in mind that from

your

> > point of view (as I understand it), the Sun is the pure and

> > unalloyed soul)?

> >

 

Lakshmi: when we are discussing the karkatwa/domain of Sun WITHIN an

individual, it is Atma. Similarly, other planets have been given

governance over different faculties of the individual…for example

Moon for mind, Mars for strength etc. There are other significations

for these planets too and these are fixed karakatwas and do not vary

from chart to chart.

 

Then there's karakatwa based on functional nature of a planet in the

chart, focusing on different areas in the life of an individual and

these keep changing from chart to chart.

 

When we are discussing chara karakatwas, it's about the collection

of influences ON an individual. How different people/situations

revolving around an individual influence or make an impact on the

individual's life. The chara karakas differ from chart to chart and

as the word "chara" implies, these represent a dynamic set of

influences. Hence you see chara karaka replacements taking place,

indicating a shift in the quality/tenor of these influences.

 

Sun represents the sthira Atma Karaka, the native…as/at the center

of these influences. Here the context in which the word "Atma" is

used is different. As it happens in every language, the context is

important and ultimately determines the functional/appropriate

meaning of the word.

 

Any planet as chara AK mimics the Sun (the "soul") and hence is the

pointer of ishta and dharma devatas in one's chart, indicating the

higher impulses of Moksha and Dharma. When Sun also becomes the

chara Atmakaraka, there's greater emphasis and urgency of all

matters "soul !! Sun's fiery nature makes such individuals

passionate, impatient, brilliant and single minded in pursuing their

goals. These traits impart an aura of haughtiness to these

individuals. A lot of this, of course, also depends on the dignity

and situation of Sun in the natal chart. But they are all, without

any doubt, very spiritually oriented.

 

>From my modest database I select the following illustrative examples

of Sun as chara Atmakaraka:

 

1) Swami Vivekananda

2) President Abdul Kalaam

3) Shri K.N Rao

4) Shri Partha Sarathy (Jyotish guru with SJC)

5) Shri Bharat

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

[Guest guest]

Pure and unalloyed Soul never take physical body.. This is the quality of Nirakar Brahma.The Universe and we the part of this universe are owned by Sakaar Brahma , which is represented in our Solar system by Kaalpursha which is lead by Sun .

There is father in every family and King of every Country. Like that Sun is Ruler of our system among many possible systems in the Universe which is beyond our understanding.

Nothing can equate with Soul , but because he is the source in our system , so he is Father to us King to us and does belong to Fire element.

We are not because of Universe but Universe is\ because of Us.

Mars too belong to Fire, the Sun gives light , and light gives Knowledge, without light you can not identify any thing in the form and shade, so Sun Tatwa is Fire Satwik.

So the anger of a Sun man is with cause and anger of Mars man is without reason due to jealous.

Sun is Karura because it does not act due to affection but cause and can burn to his own fellows.

Sun cause combustion and Moon cause Samagam, one take over the authority while moon

add the will and concentration to the joining planet.

 

Moon is Kaami because it eats through senses and the cause of work , when it is introvert it becomes the cause of self realization.

 

So even the Kaam can be good or bad.

 

There is one mind and Five elements, this mind take birth along with body and dies with it.

One get that type of mind which is necessary to the individual Jivaatma to enjoy his previous Karmas and determinations.

The planets represent 5 elements additionally Sun and Moon too join Fire and Water element.

Every individual work/desires are measurable through these planets like temperature with thermometer.

When we assign Charkarka position to a planet it involves a planet and a rashi , through which it shows to which that Jivaatma had concentrated and worked to the maximum or in which his mind was involved maximum or in which he is much mature, that becomes a movable assignment to that planet as an expression of Soul. It is like when we say for some one that his soul lives in Milk or his soul lives in Books , other vise the Saturation of Soul will have to be seen by the Sun which is fix karaka of Soul.

It clears why there is no Char Karaka of Mind.

This is how I understand the concepts , you may agree to it or not.

With Best wishes,

Inder Jit sahni

 

-

b_lakshmi_ramesh

PM

Re: Humility & learning lessons

Monday, September 04, 2006 4:15 of life/Lakshmi ji

 

 

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Sundeep ji,

 

If the

> > Sun does represent the pure and unalloyed soul in the chart

(pure

> > i.e. WITHOUT additional attributes (caused by entering a human

body)

> > lumped in), then why is there a concept of Charakarakatwa at

all, at

Ø > least for the Atma?

 

Ø How can the chara atmakarakatwa move to some

> > other graha for some people, and what then does Sun's chara

> > karakatwa in those charts represent (bearing in mind that from

your

> > point of view (as I understand it), the Sun is the pure and

> > unalloyed soul)?

> >

 

Lakshmi: when we are discussing the karkatwa/domain of Sun WITHIN an

individual, it is Atma. Similarly, other planets have been given

governance over different faculties of the individual.for example

Moon for mind, Mars for strength etc. There are other significations

for these planets too and these are fixed karakatwas and do not vary

from chart to chart.

 

Then there's karakatwa based on functional nature of a planet in the

chart, focusing on different areas in the life of an individual and

these keep changing from chart to chart.

 

When we are discussing chara karakatwas, it's about the collection

of influences ON an individual. How different people/situations

revolving around an individual influence or make an impact on the

individual's life. The chara karakas differ from chart to chart and

as the word "chara" implies, these represent a dynamic set of

influences. Hence you see chara karaka replacements taking place,

indicating a shift in the quality/tenor of these influences.

 

Sun represents the sthira Atma Karaka, the native.as/at the center

of these influences. Here the context in which the word "Atma" is

used is different. As it happens in every language, the context is

important and ultimately determines the functional/appropriate

meaning of the word.

 

Any planet as chara AK mimics the Sun (the "soul") and hence is the

pointer of ishta and dharma devatas in one's chart, indicating the

higher impulses of Moksha and Dharma. When Sun also becomes the

chara Atmakaraka, there's greater emphasis and urgency of all

matters "soul !! Sun's fiery nature makes such individuals

passionate, impatient, brilliant and single minded in pursuing their

goals. These traits impart an aura of haughtiness to these

individuals. A lot of this, of course, also depends on the dignity

and situation of Sun in the natal chart. But they are all, without

any doubt, very spiritually oriented.

 

From my modest database I select the following illustrative examples

of Sun as chara Atmakaraka:

 

1) Swami Vivekananda

2) President Abdul Kalaam

3) Shri K.N Rao

4) Shri Partha Sarathy (Jyotish guru with SJC)

5) Shri Bharat

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/436 - Release 9/1/2006

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi ji

 

I humbly feel, as in essence we are the same, we are mutually learning

to cross the ocean of samsara,which is the very purpose of taking body.

I am scribbling something based on the gains obtained during guidance/

discussion from/with Chandrashekhar ji,you and other learned

members.Read the mail from Inderjit ji on EGO.Kindly check if we are

on the right track.

 

Aaditya Bhagawan or Sun is KalaSwaroopa.He creates Time.He is karaka

for our lagna/self and gives us eyesight,paurusha and is the subtle

core in us.Let us Pray and Thank HIM for all the Light -sustaining

life. We are advocates, neither for Rahu nor for Sun.Let their

strength,in our chart,not create any bias.

 

It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -nothing belongs

to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there is a

separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called EGO or

Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For example a King

might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc resulting in

Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

 

Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

 

Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for Atman.Though Atman is

the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the purpose of

knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but part of

Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to superimposition

of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per Sankara.The

jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first entry as far as

humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma as well

follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual feeling of

me/mine is ''í''.

 

 

As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have Death and

Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact between

atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us clutch on

to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus intoxication is

nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is enhancing the

already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just keeping

together the already manifested superimposition(Atma/Mind).The level

of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the strength of

moon and further associations.

 

Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus does not make

it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not because of

Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before realization nor

after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma identifies itself

with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in other words

the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

 

Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should think of feet

through Meena/Rahu.

 

Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is EGO ,what is

pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me what is

Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated illusion in our

context?.

 

In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya(which is

the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but part of

him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a catalyst or

clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

 

If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still(if it is

possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind of

Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

 

Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space is created

and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into picture).Brahman and

Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards understanding

the sublime and far TRUTH.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

<b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>

> Om Gurave Namah

>

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

> Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting that "ego" is

> found only in some people. If we interpret dispassionately, perhaps

> Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego ( necessary

> for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being, as much as

> soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't find us

> fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego, you have

> ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it, perhaps in

> different degrees.

>

> How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to some

> people!! How wrong was i to think that we are exceptions! "Ego" is

> part of the natural state of every individual...like the kundalini

> residing in mooladhara of every one.

>

> Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in dissolving this

> separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a state of

> Realization.

>

> Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet exhilerating

> understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

>

>

>

>

> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> >

> > Om Gurave Namah

> >

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

> > > the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the above and

> > result

> > > in dukham.

> >

> > Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma reference was

> not

> > chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and certified to

> be

> > impeccable.

> >

> > Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that Saturn gives

> > contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not recall

> > Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it, please let

> me

> > know.

> >

> > I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not say

> anything

> > about Rahu representing "mada". But have they explicitly said any

> > thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not drawing

> convoluted

> > conclusions then?

> >

> > Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it when it

> doesn't?

> >

> > Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing either Sun or

> > Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said that Rahu is

> > also capable of giving great spirituality when involved in such

> > yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these days is for

> > fair treatment of all planets.

> >

> > > Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the context.Why

> Rahu

> > is

> > > just one among the shad ripus?Why not lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

> Rahu

> > is

> > > not any of these.He makes us have all these.

> >

> > Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator of "I"- a

> false

> > feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of ego (as

> > defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This feeling is also

> > the basis of the shadripus which are based on one individual being

> > different from other.

> >

> > Sun called as Atma karaka

> > > is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he enters the

> > body

> > > he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

> taking ,until

> > self

> > > realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham mentioning about

> > individual

> > > soul and its plight.

> > >

> > > Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling of ''I''.It

> is

> > just

> > > our assumption.

> >

> > Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you tell me

> > why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual lordship by Saturn

> > and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma (Saturn) and

> > unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth takes place

> > because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel trapped in a

> > body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

> >

> > Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time? Does he

> cause

> > day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's because he causes

> > the interminable birth cycle.

> >

> > According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-mails, "ego"

> is

> > a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself have said

> > that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding us giving us

> a

> > smoky/obscurant idea".

> >

> > I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this together,

> please

> > tell me if Rahu does not give a illusiory/intoxicated/false idea

> of

> > oneself.

> >

> > Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i understand the

> > way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have nothing

> > against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is bringing me

> > immense spiritual benefits, like the present discussion:--))

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > >

> >

> >

> > > Thanks

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

> > > >

> > > > I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that the shloka

> from

> > > > Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

> > > > individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

> intoxication

> > as

> > > > an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication" belong in that

> > > > context, in that group?

> > > >

> > > > I do not think either of you responded to that. perhaps you

> > missed

> > > > it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

> > > >

> > > > Can i have your response(s) please?

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , Chandrashekhar

> > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > >

> > > > > Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada does mean

> > > > intoxication

> > > > > or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to kaamana

> which

> > > > means

> > > > > desires for things possessed by others. That is what Asteya,

> > one

> > > > of the

> > > > > Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

> > > > >

> > > > > We are talking about auspiciousness or other wise of the

> > dormant

> > > > or

> > > > > awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can be

> > misinterpreted

> > > > if

> > > > > one wants to do that. But that does not serve any purpose. I

> > would

> > > > not

> > > > > go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and Avidya related to

> > Maa.

> > > > I have

> > > > > not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a shloka, to

> support

> > your

> > > > > proposition that dormant Kundalini is inauspicious and the

> > > > awakened

> > > > > Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already posted the

> way

> > my

> > > > > generation has been taught to accept an argument, so I shall

> > not

> > > > repeat

> > > > > it here.

> > > > >

> > > > > But I will not resort to conjectures and would like to quote

> > from

> > > > > Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant Kundalini.

> > Being

> > > > > graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have to translate

> > it

> > > > for you.

> > > > > Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

> > > > > ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

> > > > > devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

> > > > > devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

> > > > > mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

> > > > > mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

> > > > > sa me mat&mnuiSwta k…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

> > > > > sä me mätåmanusthitä kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

> > > > >

> > > > > I am sure you must have some quote to support your

> contention.

> > I

> > > > would

> > > > > like to see the shloka, as against conjectures, so that I

> can

> > > > improve

> > > > > upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

> > > > >

> > > > > I can understand your reluctance to support your

> propositions

> > with

> > > > > suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you by pointing

> > out

> > > > the

> > > > > inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and Rahu

> > combinations

> > > > in two

> > > > > different chart as stand out combinations only.

> > > > >

> > > > > I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and if I have

> done

> > so

> > > > > inadvertently I crave your pardon.

> > > > >

> > > > > Take care,

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha (anger), lobha

> > (greed),

> > > > moha

> > > > > > (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and maatsarya

> (jealousy)

> > > > > > If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply among the

> > > > > > shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is intoxicated/drunk

> with

> > > > > > power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya swaroopini" and

> correct

> > > > > > appreciation of Mother includes understanding of both

> > facets. As

> > > > > > Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be routed

> > towards

> > > > good

> > > > > > deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the same? The

> > wisdom,

> > > > > > required to put this immense shakti to good use, is

> > represented

> > > > by

> > > > > > Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati, wisdom and

> > power, is

> > > > > > said to be auspicious because it ensures the

> > correct/judicious

> > > > end

> > > > > > use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti is very very

> > > > > > important.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and krura. I

> also

> > > > always

> > > > > > said all planets, including Jupiter, can give malefic

> > results, if

> > > > > > they are functionally empowered to do so. You can refer to

> > all my

> > > > > > previous mails to confirm this.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sir, Truth is much more important than winning or losing an

> > > > > > argument. All discussions must proceed as an exploration

> and

> > > > > > celebration of Truth. When this is not the case, I see no

> > > > purpose in

> > > > > > continuing these discussions.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age are

> operating

> > at

> > > > > > different

> > > > > > > levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not die young.

> So

> > > > please

> > > > > > do not

> > > > > > > try to mix the issues. If you have read Swamiji's

> > biography you

> > > > > > will

> > > > > > > find that he fell sick many times despite of apparent

> > robust

> > > > > > physique.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart confirms

> with

> > his

> > > > > > being

> > > > > > > capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did not know I

> was

> > > > expected

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > analyze the entire chart. By the way if there is a Kuja

> > dosha

> > > > how

> > > > > > does

> > > > > > > that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do not bring

> our

> > > > > > devotion to

> > > > > > > Lord Rama (and we both have that) into astrological

> > analysis of

> > > > > > his chart.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Bringing in the dashas when the discussions are on the

> > effects

> > > > of

> > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > will only lead the discussion to no where. The two have

> to

> > be

> > > > seen

> > > > > > > separately as we are not trying to time an event but

> only

> > > > trying

> > > > > > to find

> > > > > > > what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you have perhaps

> > > > forgotten

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha in that

> > perspective

> > > > > > and let

> > > > > > > me know your views. And if by the way you read my mail,

> I

> > did

> > > > not

> > > > > > say

> > > > > > > anything about mars being killer for him, only that it

> > gave him

> > > > > > Sarcoma

> > > > > > > being 3rd lord.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Also could you explain why Sun being Atma and always

> > > > beneficent as

> > > > > > you

> > > > > > > have claimed all along in the thread on the topic, did

> its

> > > > > > Mahadasha

> > > > > > > prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > For example, remember that in Swami Vivekananda's

> > chart

> > > > Surya

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > lord of

> > > > > > > > > the 9th occupying the lagna and causing a powerful

> Raj

> > > > yoga. At

> > > > > > > > the same

> > > > > > > > > time if you thin how long the Swamiji lived, you may

> > have

> > > > to

> > > > > > think

> > > > > > > > again

> > > > > > > > > about saying that it did not act as Mahakrura. Think

> > about

> > > > > > what it

> > > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also, before declaring

> > that it

> > > > > > became

> > > > > > > > > shubha or less malefic.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an icchamrityu and

> looking

> > at

> > > > the

> > > > > > dass

> > > > > > > > operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that he passed

> > away in

> > > > Jup-

> > > > > > Ven-

> > > > > > > > Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-10 (3:59:13

> pm)

> > > > > > > > Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-27 (4:48:54

> > pm)

> > > > > > > > Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-12 (10:43:55

> > pm)

> > > > > > > > Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-07 (5:06:28

> am)

> > > > > > > > Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-06 (2:29:24

> > am)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05 (1:27:03 am)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus is the 2nd

> lord

> > from

> > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is in the house

> > of

> > > > Venus

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > gives the results of Venus and Saturn is the 2nd lord

> > from

> > > > > > > > lagna....all are marakas. the maraka significations

> are

> > > > stronger

> > > > > > > > from Moon, and it's the cause of his early death.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I fail to see where Sun comes into all this.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting 7th house,

> > can

> > > > give

> > > > > > > > parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore the influence

> > of

> > > > Saturn

> > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th house? I am

> > sure

> > > > even

> > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--))but

> without

> > the

> > > > raja

> > > > > > > > yoga and the strong soul-level impact he created

> > wherever he

> > > > > > went.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Or if you like look at what happened to the 7th

> > > > > > > > > Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in the 7th

> bhava.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think the strong

> > Mars in

> > > > 7th

> > > > > > > > gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You have not

> > commented

> > > > on the

> > > > > > > > exalted Saturn in 4th house.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > In each of the

> > > > > > > > > example provided by you look at the bhava that the

> > planets

> > > > > > occupy

> > > > > > > > > (barring Saturn, for reasons already stated in

> > previous

> > > > mail),

> > > > > > > > without

> > > > > > > > > looking at the charts as belonging to great people,

> > and

> > > > then

> > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > up

> > > > > > > > > your mind as to the truth or otherwise of what I

> said.

> > Did

> > > > you

> > > > > > > > know

> > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi died following a malignant sarcoma

> of

> > left

> > > > hand

> > > > > > > > and Mars

> > > > > > > > > is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in his chart, in

> > > > > > exaltation. Do

> > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > think Mars gave him benevolent results?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to examine the

> > following

> > > > dasa

> > > > > > > > sequences with an open mind. Sun is the 3rd lord from

> > Moon

> > > > (AK) &

> > > > > > > > 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's chart, rahu is

> with

> > Sun

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's effects...all of which

> > point to

> > > > > > > > dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house and ketu

> can

> > give

> > > > the

> > > > > > > > effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's effect, if at all,

> > was

> > > > only

> > > > > > > > indirect, and he was not the killer.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-03 (2:05:32

> pm)

> > > > > > > > Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-21 (8:49:14

> am)

> > > > > > > > Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-18 (12:04:47

> > am)

> > > > > > > > Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-20 (12:18:02

> > am)

> > > > > > > > Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> (11:08:26

> > pm)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14 (12:47:04

> pm)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I think what stands out is the fact that the dasa of

> the

> > > > graha

> > > > > > > > conjoined Moon brought about death. I think their mind

> > > > willed the

> > > > > > > > death.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

> > > > > > unrelated/unassociated

> > > > > > > > with itself? I request you to consider the above

> > objectively.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I will talk about the other charts/issues in my next

> > mail.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

> > > > > > > > > I do not know where you find Mars strong as a planet

> in

> > > > > > > > debilitation in

> > > > > > > > > Navamsha gives results of debility even when in

> > exaltation

> > > > in

> > > > > > rasi

> > > > > > > > > chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane smritam has

> > > > already

> > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > > mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered Mars/Venus

> in

> > > > Thakur's

> > > > > > > > chart because they are debilitated. Please go through

> my

> > > > message

> > > > > > > > again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

> > > > > > > > > aware of his revolutionary background and that he

> was

> > > > editor

> > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > paper

> > > > > > > > > "Vande Mataram" not much known for its soft language.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Same is the case with strong Malefics giving P.M.

> > Yogas.

> > > > Every

> > > > > > > > graha is

> > > > > > > > > capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga attributed

> to

> > it,

> > > > at

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > very

> > > > > > > > > least. It would only be naive to imagine they would

> > all

> > > > give

> > > > > > > > identical

> > > > > > > > > results as indicated by Parashara or all with Pancha

> > > > > > Mahapurusha

> > > > > > > > Yoga

> > > > > > > > > would only rule over different parts of India

> (barring

> > > > Saturn),

> > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > because the sage said so. The sages gave us

> principles

> > and

> > > > > > > > expected us

> > > > > > > > > to apply them to real life horoscope using Viveka.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I would gladly give you the shloka giving the

> > reference to

> > > > > > > > > "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old classic

> > respected

> > > > > > amongst

> > > > > > > > > astrologers, but as you do not seem to accept

> anything

> > that

> > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > not fit

> > > > > > > > > in with what, you think. is said by Dr. Raman, it

> > would be

> > > > an

> > > > > > > > exercise

> > > > > > > > > in futility. should you yet want the shloka I would

> of

> > > > course

> > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > glad to

> > > > > > > > > give it to you.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave namah

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > You seem to be disagreeing with Shri B.V. Raman

> that

> > > > strong

> > > > > > > > planets,

> > > > > > > > > > whether malefic or benefics give good results,

> while

> > weak

> > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > give bad results. Perhaps you also disagree about

> > strong

> > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it contrary to

> what

> > all

> > > > the

> > > > > > > > jyotish

> > > > > > > > > > texts teach?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Then, here are a few examples, where I find that

> > strong

> > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > have neither made the natives krura nor that their

> > > > > > significations

> > > > > > > > > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna and mars in

> > 5th

> > > > house

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in lagna.

> > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th house

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted Saturn(9H)

> and

> > Rahu

> > > > > > (4H).

> > > > > > > > Mars

> > > > > > > > > > and Venus are also exalted in rasi, while

> > debilitated in

> > > > > > navamsa.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sir, can you give me the reference for "vipareetam

> > shaneH

> > > > > > > > sritam"?

> > > > > > > > > > Does it, by any chance, refer to Saturn's

> placement

> > in

> > > > the

> > > > > > 8th

> > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > being beneficial?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I am happy that you agree strong Saturn gives good

> > > > results.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me from where the saying is because i

> > would

> > > > > > like to

> > > > > > > > > > read it up myself and understand.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > --- Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46@

> > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46%40.co.uk>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > About Krura planets the saying is, that with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > strength the Krura grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > become more Krura (Maha-krura) and the

> shubha

> > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > become more shubha.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Shani is more krura when weak and

> > beneficial

> > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > > > > less krura when

> > > > > > > > > > > > > strong "Viparitama shaneH smritam".

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > My sun dasa started when I was 9 years

> old,

> > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > ended when I was 15

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > years old. How come you didn't notice the

> > second

> > > > > > > > > > > > > part? I was old

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough to understand the difference between

> > > > > > > > > > > > > success and failure, I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > guess!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you agree that Rahu is giving

> > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > results, and those

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are exceptionally good, then it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically follows that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun is strong in my chart because

> according

> > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri B.V Raman, evil

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > planets, especially when weak, give bad

> > results

> > > > > > > > > > > > > (vide "a catechism

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of astrology"), while strong planets, even

> if

> > > > > > > > > > > > > evil, give good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. If my Sun were weak, he wouldn't

> be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > giving such good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > results:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Mercury is hopelessly combust and

> > inferior

> > > > > > > > > > > > > in shadbala

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength, the major results of Dharma

> > > > > > > > > > > > > karmadhipathi yoga are also

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > given by Sun, because according to "300

> > > > > > > > > > > > > combinations" of Sri

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman, a planet with higher shadbala is

> more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > likely to give the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of a yoga.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Karna, I request you to read the

> > Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Parva of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mahabharata again. When he died, the

> nature

> > bowed

> > > > > > > > > > > > > in grief, because

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > he's one of the noblest persons in

> > Mahabharata.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Even the episode you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted happened because Parashurama would

> > teach

> > > > > > > > > > > > > only Brahmins and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna desperately wanted to learn

> > dhanurvidya

> > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashurama so

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he can support Duryodhana. Deceit is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly punishable and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did pay dearly. But it's to be borne

> > in

> > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > > > > > that whatever

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did was only to please Duryodhana,

> his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > dearest friend. Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > did not gain anything personally.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the 3rd house from 8th house

> (I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > think there was a typo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > at your end). In the natural zodiac, the

> 10

> > th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > sign, being the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > cardinal earth sign, represents

> > south /dakshina

> > > > > > > > > > > > > disha. South is the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction ruled by Yama, the lord of

> death,

> > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > represents burial grounds. So, the Rudras

> > > > (Saturn,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Mars) are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong in south. Also, Sun resides in

> south

> > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > starts his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > northern voyage from here. So he has

> digbala

> > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did clarify that when I referred to

> Surya

> > as

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Karma saakshi, it's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > only to his status as antaraatma and not

> as a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > deity. Perhaps this

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > escaped your attention.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my last post on the subject.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were too young for the results of

> the

> > dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > to manifest,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > though it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is good news that your father had

> > promotions

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > you received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prizes/accolades during that time. It is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting to know you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > got

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these results at a young age of 9 or so

> as

> > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > is when Sun dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > operative. I am relieved you did not

> have

> > any

> > > > > > > > > > > > > health problems in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > March-August 1970 period.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But we are talking about Rahu and Rahu

> > would

> > > > > > > > > > > > > give results of Sun

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prominently, by conjunction, as you

> > guessed but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > also that of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You have a Dharmakarmaadhipati yoga

> after

> > all)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > and that is why I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > said

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for understanding Sun its dasha instead

> of

> > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha needs to be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > analyzed.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury is malefic not because I say so

> but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > because Jyotish says

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mercury is malefic when conjunct a papa

> > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > and he is conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > two,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the apex of Artha trikona

> and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > directly involved with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts to earn money. Though claimed to

> be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana/burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground, it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 4th from ayush sthana (8th) and its

> > home

> > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > is why affliction

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can give death. But 8th is more

> popularly

> > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > mrityu sthana and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th is called Smashana. If it is really

> > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana why would it be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karma sthana and why would Sun be at its

> > most

> > > > > > > > > > > > > brilliant there?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not say he can not represent water

> > bodies

> > > > > > > > > > > > > in temple, but not

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My Sun dasa was excellent too. My

> father

> > > > > > > > > > > > > received promotion(s),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > school/college days were great and i

> > received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > wide acclaim/prizes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for my ability in creative writing,

> > Veena,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz contests etc,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from studies. So, for a student, I

> guess

> > > > > > > > > > > > > that's excellent!!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you justify this, if Sun were

> > weak?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahu is certainly

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the yogakaraka results, but being in

> > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > house and being

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun, don't you think Rahu is also

> giving

> > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > results of Sun? You

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said that mercury is malefic and

> heavily

> > > > > > > > > > > > > combust too:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1th house also represent burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > ground/smashaana. Is that a place

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for attachment?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra represents all water bodies,

> so

> > why

> > > > > > > > > > > > > can't he represent

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temple tank?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated ===

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam

> > > > protection

> > > > > > > > around

> > > > > > > > > > > > <>

> > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > < <>>>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > < <>>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

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

> --

> > ----

> > > > ----

> > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> 268.11.7/435 -

> >

> > > > Release

> > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > 8/31/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

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

> --

> > ----

> > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/441 -

> > Release

> > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > 9/7/2006

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep,

 

I am glad that we are converging on real learning now. As the Sage

Parashara summed up, all planets/beings are but manifestations of

the supreme spirit. Have you heard the amazing lecture given by

Sanjay ji on Varaha avatara (Rahu) and how it governs/facilitates

birth (surfacing) of the body(prithvi)from the water (amniotic

fluid?).

 

Just one point. The body/mind/faculties already exist before the

soul enters it, animating all. I request you to read Aitareya

upanishad for greater understanding of this concept.

 

That's a lovely point about Rahu representing the intersecting point

of Atma and ManaH. However, is pull/attachment represented by Rahu,

who doesn't have a body and lacks the necessary mass to cause the

pull? It's Prithvi tattwa which causes attraction(Taurus-earth sign-

natural 2nd house, which governs attraction) and its the jala tattwa

which causes attachment (Cancer). So, all these pulls/attractions

and attachments are caused by interplay of body and mind.... and not

by soul.

 

Chandrasekhar ji might feel that since jala tattwa represents

moksha, it can not indicate attachments. I request you to go through

Lalithopaakhyanam to understand how "rasa" is vital to

attraction/attachment/creation and happiness.

 

But I do agree that Rahu tends to magnify everything and take over

others' significations to such an extent that we forget who is the

real karaka and attribute all these to Rahu.

 

Aham-ahanta is a huge and difficult topic and certainly not to be

attempted when one's (me, ofcourse)feeling extremely sleepy. I will

try to type out my understanding tomorrow if my sons permit me to

touch the computer, otherwise, we'll meet on Monday.

 

So, good night and happy weekend:--))

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

 

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Lakshmi ji

>

> I humbly feel, as in essence we are the same, we are mutually

learning

> to cross the ocean of samsara,which is the very purpose of taking

body.

> I am scribbling something based on the gains obtained during

guidance/

> discussion from/with Chandrashekhar ji,you and other learned

> members.Read the mail from Inderjit ji on EGO.Kindly check if we

are

> on the right track.

>

> Aaditya Bhagawan or Sun is KalaSwaroopa.He creates Time.He is

karaka

> for our lagna/self and gives us eyesight,paurusha and is the subtle

> core in us.Let us Pray and Thank HIM for all the Light -sustaining

> life. We are advocates, neither for Rahu nor for Sun.Let their

> strength,in our chart,not create any bias.

>

> It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -nothing

belongs

> to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there is a

> separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called EGO or

> Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For example a King

> might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc

resulting in

> Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

>

> Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

>

> Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for Atman.Though

Atman is

> the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the purpose of

> knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but part of

> Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to

superimposition

> of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per Sankara.The

> jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first entry as far

as

> humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma as well

> follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual feeling of

> me/mine is ''í''.

>

>

> As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have Death and

> Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact between

> atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us clutch

on

> to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus intoxication

is

> nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is enhancing

the

> already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just keeping

> together the already manifested superimposition(Atma/Mind).The

level

> of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the

strength of

> moon and further associations.

>

> Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus does not

make

> it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not because

of

> Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before realization nor

> after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma identifies itself

> with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in other

words

> the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

>

> Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should think of

feet

> through Meena/Rahu.

>

> Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is EGO ,what is

> pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me what is

> Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated illusion in

our

> context?.

>

> In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya(which is

> the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but part of

> him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a catalyst or

> clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

>

> If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still(if it

is

> possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind of

> Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

>

> Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space is created

> and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into picture).Brahman and

> Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards

understanding

> the sublime and far TRUTH.

>

> Thanks

> Pradeep

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> >

> > Om Gurave Namah

> >

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

> > Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting

that "ego" is

> > found only in some people. If we interpret dispassionately,

perhaps

> > Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego (

necessary

> > for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being, as much

as

> > soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't find us

> > fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego, you have

> > ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it, perhaps in

> > different degrees.

> >

> > How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to some

> > people!! How wrong was i to think that we are exceptions! "Ego"

is

> > part of the natural state of every individual...like the

kundalini

> > residing in mooladhara of every one.

> >

> > Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in dissolving

this

> > separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a state of

> > Realization.

> >

> > Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet exhilerating

> > understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Om Gurave Namah

> > >

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

> > > > the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the above

and

> > > result

> > > > in dukham.

> > >

> > > Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma reference

was

> > not

> > > chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and certified

to

> > be

> > > impeccable.

> > >

> > > Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that Saturn gives

> > > contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not recall

> > > Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it, please

let

> > me

> > > know.

> > >

> > > I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not say

> > anything

> > > about Rahu representing "mada". But have they explicitly said

any

> > > thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not drawing

> > convoluted

> > > conclusions then?

> > >

> > > Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it when it

> > doesn't?

> > >

> > > Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing either Sun

or

> > > Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said that Rahu

is

> > > also capable of giving great spirituality when involved in

such

> > > yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these days is

for

> > > fair treatment of all planets.

> > >

> > > > Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the context.Why

> > Rahu

> > > is

> > > > just one among the shad ripus?Why not

lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

> > Rahu

> > > is

> > > > not any of these.He makes us have all these.

> > >

> > > Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator of "I"- a

> > false

> > > feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of ego (as

> > > defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This feeling is

also

> > > the basis of the shadripus which are based on one individual

being

> > > different from other.

> > >

> > > Sun called as Atma karaka

> > > > is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he enters

the

> > > body

> > > > he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

> > taking ,until

> > > self

> > > > realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham mentioning about

> > > individual

> > > > soul and its plight.

> > > >

> > > > Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling

of ''I''.It

> > is

> > > just

> > > > our assumption.

> > >

> > > Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you tell me

> > > why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual lordship by

Saturn

> > > and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma (Saturn)

and

> > > unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth takes

place

> > > because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel trapped

in a

> > > body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

> > >

> > > Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time? Does he

> > cause

> > > day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's because he

causes

> > > the interminable birth cycle.

> > >

> > > According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-

mails, "ego"

> > is

> > > a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself have said

> > > that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding us giving

us

> > a

> > > smoky/obscurant idea".

> > >

> > > I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this together,

> > please

> > > tell me if Rahu does not give a illusiory/intoxicated/false

idea

> > of

> > > oneself.

> > >

> > > Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i understand

the

> > > way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have nothing

> > > against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is bringing

me

> > > immense spiritual benefits, like the present discussion:--))

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Lakshmi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > >

> > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

> > > > >

> > > > > I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that the

shloka

> > from

> > > > > Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

> > > > > individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

> > intoxication

> > > as

> > > > > an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication" belong in

that

> > > > > context, in that group?

> > > > >

> > > > > I do not think either of you responded to that. perhaps

you

> > > missed

> > > > > it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

> > > > >

> > > > > Can i have your response(s) please?

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , Chandrashekhar

> > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada does

mean

> > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to kaamana

> > which

> > > > > means

> > > > > > desires for things possessed by others. That is what

Asteya,

> > > one

> > > > > of the

> > > > > > Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > We are talking about auspiciousness or other wise of the

> > > dormant

> > > > > or

> > > > > > awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can be

> > > misinterpreted

> > > > > if

> > > > > > one wants to do that. But that does not serve any

purpose. I

> > > would

> > > > > not

> > > > > > go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and Avidya

related to

> > > Maa.

> > > > > I have

> > > > > > not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a shloka, to

> > support

> > > your

> > > > > > proposition that dormant Kundalini is inauspicious and

the

> > > > > awakened

> > > > > > Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already posted

the

> > way

> > > my

> > > > > > generation has been taught to accept an argument, so I

shall

> > > not

> > > > > repeat

> > > > > > it here.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But I will not resort to conjectures and would like to

quote

> > > from

> > > > > > Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant

Kundalini.

> > > Being

> > > > > > graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have to

translate

> > > it

> > > > > for you.

> > > > > > Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

> > > > > > ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

> > > > > > devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

> > > > > > devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

> > > > > > mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

> > > > > > mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

> > > > > > sa me mat&mnuiSwta k…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

> > > > > > sä me mätåmanusthitä kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I am sure you must have some quote to support your

> > contention.

> > > I

> > > > > would

> > > > > > like to see the shloka, as against conjectures, so that

I

> > can

> > > > > improve

> > > > > > upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I can understand your reluctance to support your

> > propositions

> > > with

> > > > > > suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you by

pointing

> > > out

> > > > > the

> > > > > > inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and Rahu

> > > combinations

> > > > > in two

> > > > > > different chart as stand out combinations only.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and if I

have

> > done

> > > so

> > > > > > inadvertently I crave your pardon.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha (anger), lobha

> > > (greed),

> > > > > moha

> > > > > > > (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and maatsarya

> > (jealousy)

> > > > > > > If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply among

the

> > > > > > > shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is

intoxicated/drunk

> > with

> > > > > > > power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya swaroopini" and

> > correct

> > > > > > > appreciation of Mother includes understanding of both

> > > facets. As

> > > > > > > Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be routed

> > > towards

> > > > > good

> > > > > > > deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the same?

The

> > > wisdom,

> > > > > > > required to put this immense shakti to good use, is

> > > represented

> > > > > by

> > > > > > > Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati, wisdom

and

> > > power, is

> > > > > > > said to be auspicious because it ensures the

> > > correct/judicious

> > > > > end

> > > > > > > use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti is very

very

> > > > > > > important.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and krura. I

> > also

> > > > > always

> > > > > > > said all planets, including Jupiter, can give malefic

> > > results, if

> > > > > > > they are functionally empowered to do so. You can

refer to

> > > all my

> > > > > > > previous mails to confirm this.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Sir, Truth is much more important than winning or

losing an

> > > > > > > argument. All discussions must proceed as an

exploration

> > and

> > > > > > > celebration of Truth. When this is not the case, I see

no

> > > > > purpose in

> > > > > > > continuing these discussions.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age are

> > operating

> > > at

> > > > > > > different

> > > > > > > > levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not die

young.

> > So

> > > > > please

> > > > > > > do not

> > > > > > > > try to mix the issues. If you have read Swamiji's

> > > biography you

> > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > find that he fell sick many times despite of

apparent

> > > robust

> > > > > > > physique.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart confirms

> > with

> > > his

> > > > > > > being

> > > > > > > > capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did not know

I

> > was

> > > > > expected

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > analyze the entire chart. By the way if there is a

Kuja

> > > dosha

> > > > > how

> > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do not

bring

> > our

> > > > > > > devotion to

> > > > > > > > Lord Rama (and we both have that) into astrological

> > > analysis of

> > > > > > > his chart.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Bringing in the dashas when the discussions are on

the

> > > effects

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > will only lead the discussion to no where. The two

have

> > to

> > > be

> > > > > seen

> > > > > > > > separately as we are not trying to time an event but

> > only

> > > > > trying

> > > > > > > to find

> > > > > > > > what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you have

perhaps

> > > > > forgotten

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha in that

> > > perspective

> > > > > > > and let

> > > > > > > > me know your views. And if by the way you read my

mail,

> > I

> > > did

> > > > > not

> > > > > > > say

> > > > > > > > anything about mars being killer for him, only that

it

> > > gave him

> > > > > > > Sarcoma

> > > > > > > > being 3rd lord.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Also could you explain why Sun being Atma and always

> > > > > beneficent as

> > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > have claimed all along in the thread on the topic,

did

> > its

> > > > > > > Mahadasha

> > > > > > > > prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > For example, remember that in Swami

Vivekananda's

> > > chart

> > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > lord of

> > > > > > > > > > the 9th occupying the lagna and causing a

powerful

> > Raj

> > > > > yoga. At

> > > > > > > > > the same

> > > > > > > > > > time if you thin how long the Swamiji lived, you

may

> > > have

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > think

> > > > > > > > > again

> > > > > > > > > > about saying that it did not act as Mahakrura.

Think

> > > about

> > > > > > > what it

> > > > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > > to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also, before

declaring

> > > that it

> > > > > > > became

> > > > > > > > > > shubha or less malefic.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an icchamrityu and

> > looking

> > > at

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > dass

> > > > > > > > > operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that he

passed

> > > away in

> > > > > Jup-

> > > > > > > Ven-

> > > > > > > > > Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-10

(3:59:13

> > pm)

> > > > > > > > > Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-27

(4:48:54

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-12

(10:43:55

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-07

(5:06:28

> > am)

> > > > > > > > > Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-06

(2:29:24

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05 (1:27:03

am)

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus is the

2nd

> > lord

> > > from

> > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > > and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is in the

house

> > > of

> > > > > Venus

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > gives the results of Venus and Saturn is the 2nd

lord

> > > from

> > > > > > > > > lagna....all are marakas. the maraka

significations

> > are

> > > > > stronger

> > > > > > > > > from Moon, and it's the cause of his early death.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I fail to see where Sun comes into all this.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting 7th

house,

> > > can

> > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore the

influence

> > > of

> > > > > Saturn

> > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > > Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th house? I

am

> > > sure

> > > > > even

> > > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--))but

> > without

> > > the

> > > > > raja

> > > > > > > > > yoga and the strong soul-level impact he created

> > > wherever he

> > > > > > > went.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Or if you like look at what happened to the 7th

> > > > > > > > > > Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in the 7th

> > bhava.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think the

strong

> > > Mars in

> > > > > 7th

> > > > > > > > > gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You have not

> > > commented

> > > > > on the

> > > > > > > > > exalted Saturn in 4th house.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > In each of the

> > > > > > > > > > example provided by you look at the bhava that

the

> > > planets

> > > > > > > occupy

> > > > > > > > > > (barring Saturn, for reasons already stated in

> > > previous

> > > > > mail),

> > > > > > > > > without

> > > > > > > > > > looking at the charts as belonging to great

people,

> > > and

> > > > > then

> > > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > > up

> > > > > > > > > > your mind as to the truth or otherwise of what I

> > said.

> > > Did

> > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > know

> > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi died following a malignant

sarcoma

> > of

> > > left

> > > > > hand

> > > > > > > > > and Mars

> > > > > > > > > > is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in his chart,

in

> > > > > > > exaltation. Do

> > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > think Mars gave him benevolent results?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to examine the

> > > following

> > > > > dasa

> > > > > > > > > sequences with an open mind. Sun is the 3rd lord

from

> > > Moon

> > > > > (AK) &

> > > > > > > > > 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's chart, rahu

is

> > with

> > > Sun

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's effects...all of

which

> > > point to

> > > > > > > > > dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house and

ketu

> > can

> > > give

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's effect, if at

all,

> > > was

> > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > indirect, and he was not the killer.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-03

(2:05:32

> > pm)

> > > > > > > > > Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-21

(8:49:14

> > am)

> > > > > > > > > Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-18

(12:04:47

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > > Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-20

(12:18:02

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > > Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> > (11:08:26

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

(12:47:04

> > pm)

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I think what stands out is the fact that the dasa

of

> > the

> > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > conjoined Moon brought about death. I think their

mind

> > > > > willed the

> > > > > > > > > death.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

> > > > > > > unrelated/unassociated

> > > > > > > > > with itself? I request you to consider the above

> > > objectively.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I will talk about the other charts/issues in my

next

> > > mail.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

> > > > > > > > > > I do not know where you find Mars strong as a

planet

> > in

> > > > > > > > > debilitation in

> > > > > > > > > > Navamsha gives results of debility even when in

> > > exaltation

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > rasi

> > > > > > > > > > chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane smritam

has

> > > > > already

> > > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > > > mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered

Mars/Venus

> > in

> > > > > Thakur's

> > > > > > > > > chart because they are debilitated. Please go

through

> > my

> > > > > message

> > > > > > > > > again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

> > > > > > > > > > aware of his revolutionary background and that

he

> > was

> > > > > editor

> > > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > > paper

> > > > > > > > > > "Vande Mataram" not much known for its soft

language.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Same is the case with strong Malefics giving

P.M.

> > > Yogas.

> > > > > Every

> > > > > > > > > graha is

> > > > > > > > > > capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga

attributed

> > to

> > > it,

> > > > > at

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > very

> > > > > > > > > > least. It would only be naive to imagine they

would

> > > all

> > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > identical

> > > > > > > > > > results as indicated by Parashara or all with

Pancha

> > > > > > > Mahapurusha

> > > > > > > > > Yoga

> > > > > > > > > > would only rule over different parts of India

> > (barring

> > > > > Saturn),

> > > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > > because the sage said so. The sages gave us

> > principles

> > > and

> > > > > > > > > expected us

> > > > > > > > > > to apply them to real life horoscope using

Viveka.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I would gladly give you the shloka giving the

> > > reference to

> > > > > > > > > > "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old classic

> > > respected

> > > > > > > amongst

> > > > > > > > > > astrologers, but as you do not seem to accept

> > anything

> > > that

> > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > not fit

> > > > > > > > > > in with what, you think. is said by Dr. Raman,

it

> > > would be

> > > > > an

> > > > > > > > > exercise

> > > > > > > > > > in futility. should you yet want the shloka I

would

> > of

> > > > > course

> > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > glad to

> > > > > > > > > > give it to you.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave namah

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > You seem to be disagreeing with Shri B.V.

Raman

> > that

> > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > planets,

> > > > > > > > > > > whether malefic or benefics give good results,

> > while

> > > weak

> > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > > give bad results. Perhaps you also disagree

about

> > > strong

> > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it contrary to

> > what

> > > all

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > jyotish

> > > > > > > > > > > texts teach?

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Then, here are a few examples, where I find

that

> > > strong

> > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > have neither made the natives krura nor that

their

> > > > > > > significations

> > > > > > > > > > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna and

mars in

> > > 5th

> > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in lagna.

> > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th house

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted Saturn

(9H)

> > and

> > > Rahu

> > > > > > > (4H).

> > > > > > > > > Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > and Venus are also exalted in rasi, while

> > > debilitated in

> > > > > > > navamsa.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Sir, can you give me the reference

for "vipareetam

> > > shaneH

> > > > > > > > > sritam"?

> > > > > > > > > > > Does it, by any chance, refer to Saturn's

> > placement

> > > in

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > 8th

> > > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > being beneficial?

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I am happy that you agree strong Saturn gives

good

> > > > > results.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me from where the saying is

because i

> > > would

> > > > > > > like to

> > > > > > > > > > > read it up myself and understand.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46@

> > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46%40.co.uk>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Krura planets the saying is, that

with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength the Krura grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more Krura (Maha-krura) and the

> > shubha

> > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more shubha.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Shani is more krura when weak and

> > > beneficial

> > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > less krura when

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong "Viparitama shaneH smritam".

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My sun dasa started when I was 9 years

> > old,

> > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ended when I was 15

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > years old. How come you didn't notice

the

> > > second

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > part? I was old

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough to understand the difference

between

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > success and failure, I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guess!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you agree that Rahu is

giving

> > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > results, and those

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are exceptionally good, then it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically follows that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun is strong in my chart because

> > according

> > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri B.V Raman, evil

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planets, especially when weak, give

bad

> > > results

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (vide "a catechism

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of astrology"), while strong planets,

even

> > if

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > evil, give good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. If my Sun were weak, he

wouldn't

> > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving such good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Mercury is hopelessly combust

and

> > > inferior

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in shadbala

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength, the major results of Dharma

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > karmadhipathi yoga are also

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > given by Sun, because according to "300

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > combinations" of Sri

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman, a planet with higher shadbala

is

> > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > likely to give the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of a yoga.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Karna, I request you to read

the

> > > Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parva of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mahabharata again. When he died, the

> > nature

> > > bowed

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in grief, because

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > he's one of the noblest persons in

> > > Mahabharata.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even the episode you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted happened because Parashurama

would

> > > teach

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > only Brahmins and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna desperately wanted to learn

> > > dhanurvidya

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashurama so

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he can support Duryodhana. Deceit

is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly punishable and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did pay dearly. But it's to be

borne

> > > in

> > > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that whatever

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did was only to please

Duryodhana,

> > his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > dearest friend. Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did not gain anything personally.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the 3rd house from 8th

house

> > (I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > think there was a typo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at your end). In the natural zodiac,

the

> > 10

> > > th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > sign, being the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cardinal earth sign, represents

> > > south /dakshina

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > disha. South is the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction ruled by Yama, the lord of

> > death,

> > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > represents burial grounds. So, the

Rudras

> > > > > (Saturn,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Mars) are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong in south. Also, Sun resides in

> > south

> > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > starts his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > northern voyage from here. So he has

> > digbala

> > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did clarify that when I referred to

> > Surya

> > > as

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karma saakshi, it's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only to his status as antaraatma and

not

> > as a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > deity. Perhaps this

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escaped your attention.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my last post on the subject.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

40>,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were too young for the results

of

> > the

> > > dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to manifest,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is good news that your father had

> > > promotions

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > you received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prizes/accolades during that time.

It is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting to know you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > got

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these results at a young age of 9 or

so

> > as

> > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > is when Sun dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > operative. I am relieved you did not

> > have

> > > any

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > health problems in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > March-August 1970 period.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But we are talking about Rahu and

Rahu

> > > would

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > give results of Sun

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prominently, by conjunction, as you

> > > guessed but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > also that of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You have a Dharmakarmaadhipati yoga

> > after

> > > all)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that is why I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for understanding Sun its dasha

instead

> > of

> > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha needs to be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analyzed.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury is malefic not because I say

so

> > but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > because Jyotish says

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mercury is malefic when conjunct a

papa

> > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and he is conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the apex of Artha

trikona

> > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly involved with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts to earn money. Though

claimed to

> > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana/burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground, it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 4th from ayush sthana (8th) and

its

> > > home

> > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > is why affliction

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can give death. But 8th is more

> > popularly

> > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > mrityu sthana and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th is called Smashana. If it is

really

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana why would it be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karma sthana and why would Sun be at

its

> > > most

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > brilliant there?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not say he can not represent

water

> > > bodies

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in temple, but not

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My Sun dasa was excellent too. My

> > father

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > received promotion(s),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > school/college days were great and

i

> > > received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wide acclaim/prizes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for my ability in creative

writing,

> > > Veena,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz contests etc,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from studies. So, for a student, I

> > guess

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's excellent!!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you justify this, if Sun

were

> > > weak?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahu is certainly

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the yogakaraka results, but being

in

> > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > house and being

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun, don't you think Rahu is also

> > giving

> > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of Sun? You

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said that mercury is malefic and

> > heavily

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > combust too:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1th house also represent burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground/smashaana. Is that a place

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for attachment?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra represents all water

bodies,

> > so

> > > why

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't he represent

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temple tank?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated ===

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best

spam

> > > > > protection

> > > > > > > > > around

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

<>

> > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > < <>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > < <>>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

----

> > --

> > > ----

> > > > > ----

> > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > 268.11.7/435 -

> > >

> > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > 8/31/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

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

----

> > --

> > > ----

> > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

268.12.2/441 -

> > > Release

> > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > 9/7/2006

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

removed]

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

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

----

> > --

> > > -

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

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

> > > Release

> > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > ________

> > > > > > > > Try the all-new Mail. "The New Version is

> > radically

> > > > > easier

> > > > > > > to use" – The Wall Street Journal

> > > > > > > > http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

> > > > > > > <http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html>

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

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

----

> > --

> > > ----

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

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

Release

> > >

> > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

_________

> > > > > > Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling

> > > worldwide

> > > > > with voicemail http://uk.messenger.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep,

 

As I promised yesterday, i am jotting down my nascent, quite recent

(:--)) and perhaps highly confused understanding of "aham" and hope

for corrections, especially from respected Ranjanji and Prafulla ji.

 

As you have asked, who is "I" and what is "I", that gives rise to

actions/reactions. It is not the body, because as the Chandala said

to Shankara, body is jada and can not act on its own. Is it soul,

but the Soul is actionless. so, aham can neither be body nor the

soul.

 

"aham" is the inherent quality/ability of a being, on which basis it

is distiguished/reckoned separate from others. For example, to name

a few, Ocean /Water has the quality of ebb & flow, agni has the

ability to burn, birds have the capacity to fly etc. These basic

abilities distinguish them from others and give them an

distinctive/individual identity (aham).

 

Among birds also there must be certain features peculiar to certain

species which set them apart from others. So is the case with

animals and humans. Infact, it is the case with all the creation,

which is slotted into various categories, though it's all emanated

from the same seed/beeja. It's the bhedabhraanthi roopa jnaanam.

 

Extending the same argument, perhaps it's the case with the

different organs of the body too. They all have their appointed

abilities which can not be swapped with others. Brain has the

ability to coordinate all the processes happening in the body, while

legs have the ability to transport the body. Neither can do the

other's job and each has it's own place and importance.

 

If legs accuse the "brain" of aristocracy/inflated ego because it

has been accorded a higher/more prominent place in the body, is it

correct/fair? Suppose all the organs in the body want to control the

processes in the body, in the name of "samabhavana", will the body

be able to function at all? The reverse also holds good:--))

 

God has given all beings a distinctive "talent"/identity (ego), and

how does this get manifested? It's through Shakti (ahanta), which is

a transforming/interactive aspect of Brahman, different species are

able to demonstrate/maintain their respective identities.

 

But when we forget that we are part of the Supreme Soul, and mistake

this temporary "address" as the real/permanent thing, the problems

crop up, and as you said, various attachments / aberrations seep in.

 

Then is the time for us to step on this illusion and push it down

(however good it may be for material life), ruthlessly pierce the

eye of attachment, so that the "jeeva" can understand that he's in

the true sense "Trivikrama"!

 

Rahu represents this "aham" because

 

1)it's a grey area:--))

 

2)it's the same principle, which is manifested differently in

different beings, according to their species/categories. Similarly

Rahu takes on the characteristics of the house lords/conjoined

planets, and gives different results.

 

3)Also, Rahu represents "head" (including face, please!) which

represents the main "identity" & ability of a person.

 

I am sure i have missed out on many things. Hope i made at least

some sense:--))

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

> > It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -nothing

> belongs

> > to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there is a

> > separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called EGO or

> > Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For example a

King

> > might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc

> resulting in

> > Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

> >

> > Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

> >

> > Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for Atman.Though

> Atman is

> > the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the purpose

of

> > knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but part of

> > Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to

> superimposition

> > of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per Sankara.The

> > jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first entry as

far

> as

> > humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma as

well

> > follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual feeling of

> > me/mine is ''í''.

> >

> >

> > As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have Death and

> > Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact between

> > atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us

clutch

> on

> > to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus

intoxication

> is

> > nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is enhancing

> the

> > already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just keeping

> > together the already manifested superimposition(Atma/Mind).The

> level

> > of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the

> strength of

> > moon and further associations.

> >

> > Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus does not

> make

> > it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not

because

> of

> > Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before realization

nor

> > after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma identifies

itself

> > with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in other

> words

> > the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

> >

> > Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should think of

> feet

> > through Meena/Rahu.

> >

> > Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is EGO ,what

is

> > pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me what

is

> > Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated illusion

in

> our

> > context?.

> >

> > In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya(which

is

> > the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but part of

> > him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a catalyst

or

> > clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

> >

> > If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still(if

it

> is

> > possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind of

> > Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

> >

> > Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space is

created

> > and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into picture).Brahman and

> > Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards

> understanding

> > the sublime and far TRUTH.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Om Gurave Namah

> > >

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

> > > Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting

> that "ego" is

> > > found only in some people. If we interpret dispassionately,

> perhaps

> > > Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego (

> necessary

> > > for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being, as

much

> as

> > > soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't find us

> > > fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego, you

have

> > > ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it, perhaps in

> > > different degrees.

> > >

> > > How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to some

> > > people!! How wrong was i to think that we are

exceptions! "Ego"

> is

> > > part of the natural state of every individual...like the

> kundalini

> > > residing in mooladhara of every one.

> > >

> > > Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in

dissolving

> this

> > > separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a state

of

> > > Realization.

> > >

> > > Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet exhilerating

> > > understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Lakshmi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

> > > > > the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the above

> and

> > > > result

> > > > > in dukham.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma reference

> was

> > > not

> > > > chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and

certified

> to

> > > be

> > > > impeccable.

> > > >

> > > > Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that Saturn

gives

> > > > contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not recall

> > > > Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it, please

> let

> > > me

> > > > know.

> > > >

> > > > I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not say

> > > anything

> > > > about Rahu representing "mada". But have they explicitly

said

> any

> > > > thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not drawing

> > > convoluted

> > > > conclusions then?

> > > >

> > > > Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it when it

> > > doesn't?

> > > >

> > > > Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing either

Sun

> or

> > > > Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said that

Rahu

> is

> > > > also capable of giving great spirituality when involved in

> such

> > > > yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these days

is

> for

> > > > fair treatment of all planets.

> > > >

> > > > > Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the

context.Why

> > > Rahu

> > > > is

> > > > > just one among the shad ripus?Why not

> lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

> > > Rahu

> > > > is

> > > > > not any of these.He makes us have all these.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator of "I"-

a

> > > false

> > > > feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of ego (as

> > > > defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This feeling is

> also

> > > > the basis of the shadripus which are based on one individual

> being

> > > > different from other.

> > > >

> > > > Sun called as Atma karaka

> > > > > is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he

enters

> the

> > > > body

> > > > > he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

> > > taking ,until

> > > > self

> > > > > realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham mentioning

about

> > > > individual

> > > > > soul and its plight.

> > > > >

> > > > > Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling

> of ''I''.It

> > > is

> > > > just

> > > > > our assumption.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you tell

me

> > > > why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual lordship by

> Saturn

> > > > and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma

(Saturn)

> and

> > > > unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth takes

> place

> > > > because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel

trapped

> in a

> > > > body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

> > > >

> > > > Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time? Does

he

> > > cause

> > > > day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's because he

> causes

> > > > the interminable birth cycle.

> > > >

> > > > According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-

> mails, "ego"

> > > is

> > > > a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself have

said

> > > > that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding us

giving

> us

> > > a

> > > > smoky/obscurant idea".

> > > >

> > > > I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this

together,

> > > please

> > > > tell me if Rahu does not give a illusiory/intoxicated/false

> idea

> > > of

> > > > oneself.

> > > >

> > > > Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i

understand

> the

> > > > way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have

nothing

> > > > against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is bringing

> me

> > > > immense spiritual benefits, like the present discussion:--))

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > Thanks

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that the

> shloka

> > > from

> > > > > > Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

> > > > > > individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

> > > intoxication

> > > > as

> > > > > > an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication" belong in

> that

> > > > > > context, in that group?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I do not think either of you responded to that. perhaps

> you

> > > > missed

> > > > > > it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can i have your response(s) please?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada does

> mean

> > > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > > or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to

kaamana

> > > which

> > > > > > means

> > > > > > > desires for things possessed by others. That is what

> Asteya,

> > > > one

> > > > > > of the

> > > > > > > Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > We are talking about auspiciousness or other wise of

the

> > > > dormant

> > > > > > or

> > > > > > > awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can be

> > > > misinterpreted

> > > > > > if

> > > > > > > one wants to do that. But that does not serve any

> purpose. I

> > > > would

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and Avidya

> related to

> > > > Maa.

> > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a shloka, to

> > > support

> > > > your

> > > > > > > proposition that dormant Kundalini is inauspicious and

> the

> > > > > > awakened

> > > > > > > Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already posted

> the

> > > way

> > > > my

> > > > > > > generation has been taught to accept an argument, so I

> shall

> > > > not

> > > > > > repeat

> > > > > > > it here.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > But I will not resort to conjectures and would like to

> quote

> > > > from

> > > > > > > Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant

> Kundalini.

> > > > Being

> > > > > > > graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have to

> translate

> > > > it

> > > > > > for you.

> > > > > > > Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

> > > > > > > ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

> > > > > > > devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

> > > > > > > devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

> > > > > > > mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

> > > > > > > mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

> > > > > > > sa me mat&mnuiSwta k…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

> > > > > > > sä me mätåmanusthitä kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I am sure you must have some quote to support your

> > > contention.

> > > > I

> > > > > > would

> > > > > > > like to see the shloka, as against conjectures, so

that

> I

> > > can

> > > > > > improve

> > > > > > > upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I can understand your reluctance to support your

> > > propositions

> > > > with

> > > > > > > suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you by

> pointing

> > > > out

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and Rahu

> > > > combinations

> > > > > > in two

> > > > > > > different chart as stand out combinations only.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and if I

> have

> > > done

> > > > so

> > > > > > > inadvertently I crave your pardon.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha (anger),

lobha

> > > > (greed),

> > > > > > moha

> > > > > > > > (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and maatsarya

> > > (jealousy)

> > > > > > > > If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply among

> the

> > > > > > > > shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is

> intoxicated/drunk

> > > with

> > > > > > > > power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya swaroopini" and

> > > correct

> > > > > > > > appreciation of Mother includes understanding of

both

> > > > facets. As

> > > > > > > > Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be

routed

> > > > towards

> > > > > > good

> > > > > > > > deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the same?

> The

> > > > wisdom,

> > > > > > > > required to put this immense shakti to good use, is

> > > > represented

> > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati, wisdom

> and

> > > > power, is

> > > > > > > > said to be auspicious because it ensures the

> > > > correct/judicious

> > > > > > end

> > > > > > > > use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti is

very

> very

> > > > > > > > important.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and krura.

I

> > > also

> > > > > > always

> > > > > > > > said all planets, including Jupiter, can give

malefic

> > > > results, if

> > > > > > > > they are functionally empowered to do so. You can

> refer to

> > > > all my

> > > > > > > > previous mails to confirm this.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Sir, Truth is much more important than winning or

> losing an

> > > > > > > > argument. All discussions must proceed as an

> exploration

> > > and

> > > > > > > > celebration of Truth. When this is not the case, I

see

> no

> > > > > > purpose in

> > > > > > > > continuing these discussions.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > <%40>,

Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age are

> > > operating

> > > > at

> > > > > > > > different

> > > > > > > > > levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not die

> young.

> > > So

> > > > > > please

> > > > > > > > do not

> > > > > > > > > try to mix the issues. If you have read Swamiji's

> > > > biography you

> > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > find that he fell sick many times despite of

> apparent

> > > > robust

> > > > > > > > physique.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart

confirms

> > > with

> > > > his

> > > > > > > > being

> > > > > > > > > capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did not

know

> I

> > > was

> > > > > > expected

> > > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > analyze the entire chart. By the way if there is a

> Kuja

> > > > dosha

> > > > > > how

> > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do not

> bring

> > > our

> > > > > > > > devotion to

> > > > > > > > > Lord Rama (and we both have that) into

astrological

> > > > analysis of

> > > > > > > > his chart.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Bringing in the dashas when the discussions are on

> the

> > > > effects

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > will only lead the discussion to no where. The two

> have

> > > to

> > > > be

> > > > > > seen

> > > > > > > > > separately as we are not trying to time an event

but

> > > only

> > > > > > trying

> > > > > > > > to find

> > > > > > > > > what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you have

> perhaps

> > > > > > forgotten

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha in

that

> > > > perspective

> > > > > > > > and let

> > > > > > > > > me know your views. And if by the way you read my

> mail,

> > > I

> > > > did

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > say

> > > > > > > > > anything about mars being killer for him, only

that

> it

> > > > gave him

> > > > > > > > Sarcoma

> > > > > > > > > being 3rd lord.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Also could you explain why Sun being Atma and

always

> > > > > > beneficent as

> > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > have claimed all along in the thread on the topic,

> did

> > > its

> > > > > > > > Mahadasha

> > > > > > > > > prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > For example, remember that in Swami

> Vivekananda's

> > > > chart

> > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > lord of

> > > > > > > > > > > the 9th occupying the lagna and causing a

> powerful

> > > Raj

> > > > > > yoga. At

> > > > > > > > > > the same

> > > > > > > > > > > time if you thin how long the Swamiji lived,

you

> may

> > > > have

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > think

> > > > > > > > > > again

> > > > > > > > > > > about saying that it did not act as Mahakrura.

> Think

> > > > about

> > > > > > > > what it

> > > > > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > > > to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also, before

> declaring

> > > > that it

> > > > > > > > became

> > > > > > > > > > > shubha or less malefic.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an icchamrityu and

> > > looking

> > > > at

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > dass

> > > > > > > > > > operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that he

> passed

> > > > away in

> > > > > > Jup-

> > > > > > > > Ven-

> > > > > > > > > > Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-10

> (3:59:13

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-27

> (4:48:54

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-12

> (10:43:55

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-07

> (5:06:28

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-06

> (2:29:24

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05

(1:27:03

> am)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus is the

> 2nd

> > > lord

> > > > from

> > > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > > > and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is in the

> house

> > > > of

> > > > > > Venus

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > gives the results of Venus and Saturn is the 2nd

> lord

> > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > lagna....all are marakas. the maraka

> significations

> > > are

> > > > > > stronger

> > > > > > > > > > from Moon, and it's the cause of his early death.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I fail to see where Sun comes into all this.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting 7th

> house,

> > > > can

> > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore the

> influence

> > > > of

> > > > > > Saturn

> > > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > > > Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th house?

I

> am

> > > > sure

> > > > > > even

> > > > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > > Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--))but

> > > without

> > > > the

> > > > > > raja

> > > > > > > > > > yoga and the strong soul-level impact he created

> > > > wherever he

> > > > > > > > went.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Or if you like look at what happened to the 7th

> > > > > > > > > > > Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in the

7th

> > > bhava.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think the

> strong

> > > > Mars in

> > > > > > 7th

> > > > > > > > > > gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You have not

> > > > commented

> > > > > > on the

> > > > > > > > > > exalted Saturn in 4th house.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > In each of the

> > > > > > > > > > > example provided by you look at the bhava that

> the

> > > > planets

> > > > > > > > occupy

> > > > > > > > > > > (barring Saturn, for reasons already stated in

> > > > previous

> > > > > > mail),

> > > > > > > > > > without

> > > > > > > > > > > looking at the charts as belonging to great

> people,

> > > > and

> > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > > > up

> > > > > > > > > > > your mind as to the truth or otherwise of what

I

> > > said.

> > > > Did

> > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > know

> > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi died following a malignant

> sarcoma

> > > of

> > > > left

> > > > > > hand

> > > > > > > > > > and Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in his

chart,

> in

> > > > > > > > exaltation. Do

> > > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > think Mars gave him benevolent results?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to examine the

> > > > following

> > > > > > dasa

> > > > > > > > > > sequences with an open mind. Sun is the 3rd lord

> from

> > > > Moon

> > > > > > (AK) &

> > > > > > > > > > 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's chart, rahu

> is

> > > with

> > > > Sun

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's effects...all of

> which

> > > > point to

> > > > > > > > > > dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house and

> ketu

> > > can

> > > > give

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's effect, if

at

> all,

> > > > was

> > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > indirect, and he was not the killer.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-03

> (2:05:32

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-21

> (8:49:14

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-18

> (12:04:47

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-20

> (12:18:02

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> > > (11:08:26

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> (12:47:04

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I think what stands out is the fact that the

dasa

> of

> > > the

> > > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > conjoined Moon brought about death. I think

their

> mind

> > > > > > willed the

> > > > > > > > > > death.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

> > > > > > > > unrelated/unassociated

> > > > > > > > > > with itself? I request you to consider the above

> > > > objectively.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I will talk about the other charts/issues in my

> next

> > > > mail.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

> > > > > > > > > > > I do not know where you find Mars strong as a

> planet

> > > in

> > > > > > > > > > debilitation in

> > > > > > > > > > > Navamsha gives results of debility even when

in

> > > > exaltation

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > rasi

> > > > > > > > > > > chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane

smritam

> has

> > > > > > already

> > > > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > > > > mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered

> Mars/Venus

> > > in

> > > > > > Thakur's

> > > > > > > > > > chart because they are debilitated. Please go

> through

> > > my

> > > > > > message

> > > > > > > > > > again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

> > > > > > > > > > > aware of his revolutionary background and that

> he

> > > was

> > > > > > editor

> > > > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > > > paper

> > > > > > > > > > > "Vande Mataram" not much known for its soft

> language.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Same is the case with strong Malefics giving

> P.M.

> > > > Yogas.

> > > > > > Every

> > > > > > > > > > graha is

> > > > > > > > > > > capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga

> attributed

> > > to

> > > > it,

> > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > very

> > > > > > > > > > > least. It would only be naive to imagine they

> would

> > > > all

> > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > identical

> > > > > > > > > > > results as indicated by Parashara or all with

> Pancha

> > > > > > > > Mahapurusha

> > > > > > > > > > Yoga

> > > > > > > > > > > would only rule over different parts of India

> > > (barring

> > > > > > Saturn),

> > > > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > > > because the sage said so. The sages gave us

> > > principles

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > expected us

> > > > > > > > > > > to apply them to real life horoscope using

> Viveka.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I would gladly give you the shloka giving the

> > > > reference to

> > > > > > > > > > > "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old

classic

> > > > respected

> > > > > > > > amongst

> > > > > > > > > > > astrologers, but as you do not seem to accept

> > > anything

> > > > that

> > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > not fit

> > > > > > > > > > > in with what, you think. is said by Dr. Raman,

> it

> > > > would be

> > > > > > an

> > > > > > > > > > exercise

> > > > > > > > > > > in futility. should you yet want the shloka I

> would

> > > of

> > > > > > course

> > > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > glad to

> > > > > > > > > > > give it to you.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave namah

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > You seem to be disagreeing with Shri B.V.

> Raman

> > > that

> > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > planets,

> > > > > > > > > > > > whether malefic or benefics give good

results,

> > > while

> > > > weak

> > > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > > > give bad results. Perhaps you also disagree

> about

> > > > strong

> > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it contrary

to

> > > what

> > > > all

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > jyotish

> > > > > > > > > > > > texts teach?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Then, here are a few examples, where I find

> that

> > > > strong

> > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > have neither made the natives krura nor that

> their

> > > > > > > > significations

> > > > > > > > > > > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna and

> mars in

> > > > 5th

> > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in lagna.

> > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th house

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted Saturn

> (9H)

> > > and

> > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > (4H).

> > > > > > > > > > Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > and Venus are also exalted in rasi, while

> > > > debilitated in

> > > > > > > > navamsa.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, can you give me the reference

> for "vipareetam

> > > > shaneH

> > > > > > > > > > sritam"?

> > > > > > > > > > > > Does it, by any chance, refer to Saturn's

> > > placement

> > > > in

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > 8th

> > > > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > being beneficial?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I am happy that you agree strong Saturn

gives

> good

> > > > > > results.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me from where the saying is

> because i

> > > > would

> > > > > > > > like to

> > > > > > > > > > > > read it up myself and understand.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46@

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46%40.co.uk>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Krura planets the saying is,

that

> with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength the Krura grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more Krura (Maha-krura) and the

> > > shubha

> > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more shubha.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Shani is more krura when weak and

> > > > beneficial

> > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > less krura when

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong "Viparitama shaneH smritam".

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My sun dasa started when I was 9

years

> > > old,

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ended when I was 15

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > years old. How come you didn't

notice

> the

> > > > second

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > part? I was old

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough to understand the difference

> between

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > success and failure, I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guess!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you agree that Rahu is

> giving

> > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results, and those

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are exceptionally good, then

it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically follows that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun is strong in my chart because

> > > according

> > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri B.V Raman, evil

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planets, especially when weak, give

> bad

> > > > results

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (vide "a catechism

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of astrology"), while strong

planets,

> even

> > > if

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evil, give good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. If my Sun were weak, he

> wouldn't

> > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving such good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Mercury is hopelessly combust

> and

> > > > inferior

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in shadbala

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength, the major results of Dharma

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karmadhipathi yoga are also

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > given by Sun, because according

to "300

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combinations" of Sri

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman, a planet with higher shadbala

> is

> > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > likely to give the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of a yoga.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Karna, I request you to

read

> the

> > > > Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parva of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mahabharata again. When he died, the

> > > nature

> > > > bowed

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in grief, because

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > he's one of the noblest persons in

> > > > Mahabharata.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even the episode you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted happened because Parashurama

> would

> > > > teach

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only Brahmins and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna desperately wanted to learn

> > > > dhanurvidya

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashurama so

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he can support Duryodhana.

Deceit

> is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly punishable and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did pay dearly. But it's to be

> borne

> > > > in

> > > > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that whatever

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did was only to please

> Duryodhana,

> > > his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dearest friend. Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did not gain anything personally.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the 3rd house from 8th

> house

> > > (I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think there was a typo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at your end). In the natural zodiac,

> the

> > > 10

> > > > th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sign, being the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cardinal earth sign, represents

> > > > south /dakshina

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disha. South is the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction ruled by Yama, the lord of

> > > death,

> > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > represents burial grounds. So, the

> Rudras

> > > > > > (Saturn,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Mars) are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong in south. Also, Sun resides

in

> > > south

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > starts his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > northern voyage from here. So he has

> > > digbala

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did clarify that when I referred

to

> > > Surya

> > > > as

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karma saakshi, it's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only to his status as antaraatma and

> not

> > > as a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deity. Perhaps this

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escaped your attention.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my last post on the subject.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

> 40>,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were too young for the results

> of

> > > the

> > > > dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to manifest,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is good news that your father had

> > > > promotions

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prizes/accolades during that time.

> It is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting to know you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > got

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these results at a young age of 9

or

> so

> > > as

> > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is when Sun dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > operative. I am relieved you did

not

> > > have

> > > > any

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > health problems in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > March-August 1970 period.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But we are talking about Rahu and

> Rahu

> > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give results of Sun

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prominently, by conjunction, as

you

> > > > guessed but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also that of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You have a Dharmakarmaadhipati

yoga

> > > after

> > > > all)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that is why I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for understanding Sun its dasha

> instead

> > > of

> > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha needs to be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analyzed.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury is malefic not because I

say

> so

> > > but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because Jyotish says

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mercury is malefic when conjunct a

> papa

> > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and he is conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the apex of Artha

> trikona

> > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly involved with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts to earn money. Though

> claimed to

> > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana/burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground, it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 4th from ayush sthana (8th) and

> its

> > > > home

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is why affliction

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can give death. But 8th is more

> > > popularly

> > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mrityu sthana and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th is called Smashana. If it is

> really

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana why would it be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karma sthana and why would Sun be

at

> its

> > > > most

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brilliant there?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not say he can not represent

> water

> > > > bodies

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in temple, but not

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My Sun dasa was excellent too.

My

> > > father

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > received promotion(s),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > school/college days were great

and

> i

> > > > received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wide acclaim/prizes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for my ability in creative

> writing,

> > > > Veena,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz contests etc,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from studies. So, for a student,

I

> > > guess

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's excellent!!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you justify this, if Sun

> were

> > > > weak?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahu is certainly

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the yogakaraka results, but

being

> in

> > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house and being

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun, don't you think Rahu is

also

> > > giving

> > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of Sun? You

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said that mercury is malefic and

> > > heavily

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combust too:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1th house also represent burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground/smashaana. Is that a place

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for attachment?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra represents all water

> bodies,

> > > so

> > > > why

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't he represent

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temple tank?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated ===

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best

> spam

> > > > > > protection

> > > > > > > > > > around

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> <>

> > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > > < <>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > <

<>

> > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > > < <>>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > --

> > > > ----

> > > > > > ----

> > > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > > 268.11.7/435 -

> > > >

> > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > > 8/31/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have

been

> > > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > --

> > > > ----

> > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> 268.12.2/441 -

> > > > Release

> > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > 9/7/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > --

> > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

 

> > > > Release

> > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > ________

> > > > > > > > > Try the all-new Mail. "The New Version is

> > > radically

> > > > > > easier

> > > > > > > > to use" – The Wall Street Journal

> > > > > > > > > http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

> > > > > > > > <http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html>

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > --

> > > > ----

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

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

> Release

> > > >

> > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> _________

> > > > > > > Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling

> > > > worldwide

> > > > > > with voicemail http://uk.messenger.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi ji

 

Sorry for the delay.Can imagine your struggle for computer free time:-).

Thanks for the reference on Aiteraya Upanishad.

 

Rashis and tattwas as you know is the field.Same is body.Only the

planets can enliven them.Rasa is important and is the essence.Sarpa is

connected to water and trees.Trees have watery essence namely the

Sap.Thus Rahu is having a role for link.Moreover we have seen Tantrik

references regarding importance of rahu for sivashakthi aikya.

 

Rahu is TIME serpent and hence is part of TIME/SPACE itself.Pull

mentioned was the effect,and the seed or source is Soul/Mind

itself.Necessary energy is obtained through the movement or

progression of Sun/Moon.When Sun/Moon merges into ONE everything else

disappears.As it is a Chaaya Graha it cannot cast any drishti like the

other

seven.Throught flux it can influence conjoining grahas as well as

extract/absorb Rashi qualities.Also as you know reversal of essence is

the beginning.Kindly link it with kundalini as sarpa and reversal.

 

Please give me the link for Sanjay jis lecture ,i can listen to what

is said.

 

Also in another mail you have mentioned about Jupiter and Ananda.True

wisdom is ananda and hence Guru is karaka.Shukra gives

Paramananda.Poets have said Anandam Anandanandam Jagadanandam

sangeetham!!!.The bliss, Union ,confluence ,continous flow,which music

can bestow is beyond words.Also continous integrated consciousness is

Brahmam.Shukra is for finer wisdom and Guru for broad wisdom.Nada can

permeate and open even the subtlest and finer openings within us.

 

Not only music ,if you can absorb the rasa oozing from the bhavas on

to which Padma subrahmaniam is merging,one can get closer.When Sachin

Tendulkar or Brian Lara sights a ball in advance,send a stimulus to

brain,transfer the signals to hand/feet and body,and play a stroke

with timing and perfect balance,and everything happening within split

of a second - It is Aananda for them !!!.In other words

perfection,continous perfection is HIM.If we can union with him even

for a second Ananda Rasa Oozes.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

 

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

<b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>

> Om Gurave Namah

>

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> I am glad that we are converging on real learning now. As the Sage

> Parashara summed up, all planets/beings are but manifestations of

> the supreme spirit. Have you heard the amazing lecture given by

> Sanjay ji on Varaha avatara (Rahu) and how it governs/facilitates

> birth (surfacing) of the body(prithvi)from the water (amniotic

> fluid?).

>

> Just one point. The body/mind/faculties already exist before the

> soul enters it, animating all. I request you to read Aitareya

> upanishad for greater understanding of this concept.

>

> That's a lovely point about Rahu representing the intersecting point

> of Atma and ManaH. However, is pull/attachment represented by Rahu,

> who doesn't have a body and lacks the necessary mass to cause the

> pull? It's Prithvi tattwa which causes attraction(Taurus-earth sign-

> natural 2nd house, which governs attraction) and its the jala tattwa

> which causes attachment (Cancer). So, all these pulls/attractions

> and attachments are caused by interplay of body and mind.... and not

> by soul.

>

> Chandrasekhar ji might feel that since jala tattwa represents

> moksha, it can not indicate attachments. I request you to go through

> Lalithopaakhyanam to understand how "rasa" is vital to

> attraction/attachment/creation and happiness.

>

> But I do agree that Rahu tends to magnify everything and take over

> others' significations to such an extent that we forget who is the

> real karaka and attribute all these to Rahu.

>

> Aham-ahanta is a huge and difficult topic and certainly not to be

> attempted when one's (me, ofcourse)feeling extremely sleepy. I will

> try to type out my understanding tomorrow if my sons permit me to

> touch the computer, otherwise, we'll meet on Monday.

>

> So, good night and happy weekend:--))

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

>

>

> , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Lakshmi ji

> >

> > I humbly feel, as in essence we are the same, we are mutually

> learning

> > to cross the ocean of samsara,which is the very purpose of taking

> body.

> > I am scribbling something based on the gains obtained during

> guidance/

> > discussion from/with Chandrashekhar ji,you and other learned

> > members.Read the mail from Inderjit ji on EGO.Kindly check if we

> are

> > on the right track.

> >

> > Aaditya Bhagawan or Sun is KalaSwaroopa.He creates Time.He is

> karaka

> > for our lagna/self and gives us eyesight,paurusha and is the subtle

> > core in us.Let us Pray and Thank HIM for all the Light -sustaining

> > life. We are advocates, neither for Rahu nor for Sun.Let their

> > strength,in our chart,not create any bias.

> >

> > It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -nothing

> belongs

> > to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there is a

> > separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called EGO or

> > Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For example a King

> > might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc

> resulting in

> > Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

> >

> > Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

> >

> > Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for Atman.Though

> Atman is

> > the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the purpose of

> > knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but part of

> > Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to

> superimposition

> > of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per Sankara.The

> > jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first entry as far

> as

> > humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma as well

> > follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual feeling of

> > me/mine is ''í''.

> >

> >

> > As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have Death and

> > Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact between

> > atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us clutch

> on

> > to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus intoxication

> is

> > nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is enhancing

> the

> > already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just keeping

> > together the already manifested superimposition(Atma/Mind).The

> level

> > of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the

> strength of

> > moon and further associations.

> >

> > Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus does not

> make

> > it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not because

> of

> > Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before realization nor

> > after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma identifies itself

> > with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in other

> words

> > the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

> >

> > Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should think of

> feet

> > through Meena/Rahu.

> >

> > Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is EGO ,what is

> > pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me what is

> > Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated illusion in

> our

> > context?.

> >

> > In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya(which is

> > the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but part of

> > him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a catalyst or

> > clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

> >

> > If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still(if it

> is

> > possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind of

> > Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

> >

> > Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space is created

> > and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into picture).Brahman and

> > Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards

> understanding

> > the sublime and far TRUTH.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Om Gurave Namah

> > >

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

> > > Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting

> that "ego" is

> > > found only in some people. If we interpret dispassionately,

> perhaps

> > > Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego (

> necessary

> > > for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being, as much

> as

> > > soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't find us

> > > fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego, you have

> > > ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it, perhaps in

> > > different degrees.

> > >

> > > How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to some

> > > people!! How wrong was i to think that we are exceptions! "Ego"

> is

> > > part of the natural state of every individual...like the

> kundalini

> > > residing in mooladhara of every one.

> > >

> > > Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in dissolving

> this

> > > separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a state of

> > > Realization.

> > >

> > > Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet exhilerating

> > > understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Lakshmi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

> > > > > the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the above

> and

> > > > result

> > > > > in dukham.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma reference

> was

> > > not

> > > > chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and certified

> to

> > > be

> > > > impeccable.

> > > >

> > > > Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that Saturn gives

> > > > contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not recall

> > > > Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it, please

> let

> > > me

> > > > know.

> > > >

> > > > I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not say

> > > anything

> > > > about Rahu representing "mada". But have they explicitly said

> any

> > > > thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not drawing

> > > convoluted

> > > > conclusions then?

> > > >

> > > > Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it when it

> > > doesn't?

> > > >

> > > > Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing either Sun

> or

> > > > Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said that Rahu

> is

> > > > also capable of giving great spirituality when involved in

> such

> > > > yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these days is

> for

> > > > fair treatment of all planets.

> > > >

> > > > > Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the context.Why

> > > Rahu

> > > > is

> > > > > just one among the shad ripus?Why not

> lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

> > > Rahu

> > > > is

> > > > > not any of these.He makes us have all these.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator of "I"- a

> > > false

> > > > feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of ego (as

> > > > defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This feeling is

> also

> > > > the basis of the shadripus which are based on one individual

> being

> > > > different from other.

> > > >

> > > > Sun called as Atma karaka

> > > > > is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he enters

> the

> > > > body

> > > > > he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

> > > taking ,until

> > > > self

> > > > > realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham mentioning about

> > > > individual

> > > > > soul and its plight.

> > > > >

> > > > > Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling

> of ''I''.It

> > > is

> > > > just

> > > > > our assumption.

> > > >

> > > > Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you tell me

> > > > why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual lordship by

> Saturn

> > > > and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma (Saturn)

> and

> > > > unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth takes

> place

> > > > because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel trapped

> in a

> > > > body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

> > > >

> > > > Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time? Does he

> > > cause

> > > > day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's because he

> causes

> > > > the interminable birth cycle.

> > > >

> > > > According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-

> mails, "ego"

> > > is

> > > > a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself have said

> > > > that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding us giving

> us

> > > a

> > > > smoky/obscurant idea".

> > > >

> > > > I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this together,

> > > please

> > > > tell me if Rahu does not give a illusiory/intoxicated/false

> idea

> > > of

> > > > oneself.

> > > >

> > > > Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i understand

> the

> > > > way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have nothing

> > > > against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is bringing

> me

> > > > immense spiritual benefits, like the present discussion:--))

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > Thanks

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that the

> shloka

> > > from

> > > > > > Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

> > > > > > individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

> > > intoxication

> > > > as

> > > > > > an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication" belong in

> that

> > > > > > context, in that group?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I do not think either of you responded to that. perhaps

> you

> > > > missed

> > > > > > it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can i have your response(s) please?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada does

> mean

> > > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > > or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to kaamana

> > > which

> > > > > > means

> > > > > > > desires for things possessed by others. That is what

> Asteya,

> > > > one

> > > > > > of the

> > > > > > > Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > We are talking about auspiciousness or other wise of the

> > > > dormant

> > > > > > or

> > > > > > > awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can be

> > > > misinterpreted

> > > > > > if

> > > > > > > one wants to do that. But that does not serve any

> purpose. I

> > > > would

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and Avidya

> related to

> > > > Maa.

> > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a shloka, to

> > > support

> > > > your

> > > > > > > proposition that dormant Kundalini is inauspicious and

> the

> > > > > > awakened

> > > > > > > Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already posted

> the

> > > way

> > > > my

> > > > > > > generation has been taught to accept an argument, so I

> shall

> > > > not

> > > > > > repeat

> > > > > > > it here.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > But I will not resort to conjectures and would like to

> quote

> > > > from

> > > > > > > Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant

> Kundalini.

> > > > Being

> > > > > > > graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have to

> translate

> > > > it

> > > > > > for you.

> > > > > > > Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

> > > > > > > ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

> > > > > > > devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

> > > > > > > devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

> > > > > > > mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

> > > > > > > mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

> > > > > > > sa me mat&mnuiSwta k…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

> > > > > > > sä me mätåmanusthitä kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I am sure you must have some quote to support your

> > > contention.

> > > > I

> > > > > > would

> > > > > > > like to see the shloka, as against conjectures, so that

> I

> > > can

> > > > > > improve

> > > > > > > upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I can understand your reluctance to support your

> > > propositions

> > > > with

> > > > > > > suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you by

> pointing

> > > > out

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and Rahu

> > > > combinations

> > > > > > in two

> > > > > > > different chart as stand out combinations only.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and if I

> have

> > > done

> > > > so

> > > > > > > inadvertently I crave your pardon.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha (anger), lobha

> > > > (greed),

> > > > > > moha

> > > > > > > > (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and maatsarya

> > > (jealousy)

> > > > > > > > If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply among

> the

> > > > > > > > shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is

> intoxicated/drunk

> > > with

> > > > > > > > power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya swaroopini" and

> > > correct

> > > > > > > > appreciation of Mother includes understanding of both

> > > > facets. As

> > > > > > > > Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be routed

> > > > towards

> > > > > > good

> > > > > > > > deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the same?

> The

> > > > wisdom,

> > > > > > > > required to put this immense shakti to good use, is

> > > > represented

> > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati, wisdom

> and

> > > > power, is

> > > > > > > > said to be auspicious because it ensures the

> > > > correct/judicious

> > > > > > end

> > > > > > > > use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti is very

> very

> > > > > > > > important.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and krura. I

> > > also

> > > > > > always

> > > > > > > > said all planets, including Jupiter, can give malefic

> > > > results, if

> > > > > > > > they are functionally empowered to do so. You can

> refer to

> > > > all my

> > > > > > > > previous mails to confirm this.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Sir, Truth is much more important than winning or

> losing an

> > > > > > > > argument. All discussions must proceed as an

> exploration

> > > and

> > > > > > > > celebration of Truth. When this is not the case, I see

> no

> > > > > > purpose in

> > > > > > > > continuing these discussions.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age are

> > > operating

> > > > at

> > > > > > > > different

> > > > > > > > > levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not die

> young.

> > > So

> > > > > > please

> > > > > > > > do not

> > > > > > > > > try to mix the issues. If you have read Swamiji's

> > > > biography you

> > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > find that he fell sick many times despite of

> apparent

> > > > robust

> > > > > > > > physique.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart confirms

> > > with

> > > > his

> > > > > > > > being

> > > > > > > > > capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did not know

> I

> > > was

> > > > > > expected

> > > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > analyze the entire chart. By the way if there is a

> Kuja

> > > > dosha

> > > > > > how

> > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do not

> bring

> > > our

> > > > > > > > devotion to

> > > > > > > > > Lord Rama (and we both have that) into astrological

> > > > analysis of

> > > > > > > > his chart.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Bringing in the dashas when the discussions are on

> the

> > > > effects

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > will only lead the discussion to no where. The two

> have

> > > to

> > > > be

> > > > > > seen

> > > > > > > > > separately as we are not trying to time an event but

> > > only

> > > > > > trying

> > > > > > > > to find

> > > > > > > > > what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you have

> perhaps

> > > > > > forgotten

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha in that

> > > > perspective

> > > > > > > > and let

> > > > > > > > > me know your views. And if by the way you read my

> mail,

> > > I

> > > > did

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > say

> > > > > > > > > anything about mars being killer for him, only that

> it

> > > > gave him

> > > > > > > > Sarcoma

> > > > > > > > > being 3rd lord.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Also could you explain why Sun being Atma and always

> > > > > > beneficent as

> > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > have claimed all along in the thread on the topic,

> did

> > > its

> > > > > > > > Mahadasha

> > > > > > > > > prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > For example, remember that in Swami

> Vivekananda's

> > > > chart

> > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > lord of

> > > > > > > > > > > the 9th occupying the lagna and causing a

> powerful

> > > Raj

> > > > > > yoga. At

> > > > > > > > > > the same

> > > > > > > > > > > time if you thin how long the Swamiji lived, you

> may

> > > > have

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > think

> > > > > > > > > > again

> > > > > > > > > > > about saying that it did not act as Mahakrura.

> Think

> > > > about

> > > > > > > > what it

> > > > > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > > > to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also, before

> declaring

> > > > that it

> > > > > > > > became

> > > > > > > > > > > shubha or less malefic.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an icchamrityu and

> > > looking

> > > > at

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > dass

> > > > > > > > > > operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that he

> passed

> > > > away in

> > > > > > Jup-

> > > > > > > > Ven-

> > > > > > > > > > Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-10

> (3:59:13

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-27

> (4:48:54

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-12

> (10:43:55

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-07

> (5:06:28

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-06

> (2:29:24

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05 (1:27:03

> am)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus is the

> 2nd

> > > lord

> > > > from

> > > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > > > and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is in the

> house

> > > > of

> > > > > > Venus

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > gives the results of Venus and Saturn is the 2nd

> lord

> > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > lagna....all are marakas. the maraka

> significations

> > > are

> > > > > > stronger

> > > > > > > > > > from Moon, and it's the cause of his early death.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I fail to see where Sun comes into all this.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting 7th

> house,

> > > > can

> > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore the

> influence

> > > > of

> > > > > > Saturn

> > > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > > > Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th house? I

> am

> > > > sure

> > > > > > even

> > > > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > > Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--))but

> > > without

> > > > the

> > > > > > raja

> > > > > > > > > > yoga and the strong soul-level impact he created

> > > > wherever he

> > > > > > > > went.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Or if you like look at what happened to the 7th

> > > > > > > > > > > Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in the 7th

> > > bhava.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think the

> strong

> > > > Mars in

> > > > > > 7th

> > > > > > > > > > gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You have not

> > > > commented

> > > > > > on the

> > > > > > > > > > exalted Saturn in 4th house.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > In each of the

> > > > > > > > > > > example provided by you look at the bhava that

> the

> > > > planets

> > > > > > > > occupy

> > > > > > > > > > > (barring Saturn, for reasons already stated in

> > > > previous

> > > > > > mail),

> > > > > > > > > > without

> > > > > > > > > > > looking at the charts as belonging to great

> people,

> > > > and

> > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > > > up

> > > > > > > > > > > your mind as to the truth or otherwise of what I

> > > said.

> > > > Did

> > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > know

> > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi died following a malignant

> sarcoma

> > > of

> > > > left

> > > > > > hand

> > > > > > > > > > and Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in his chart,

> in

> > > > > > > > exaltation. Do

> > > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > think Mars gave him benevolent results?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to examine the

> > > > following

> > > > > > dasa

> > > > > > > > > > sequences with an open mind. Sun is the 3rd lord

> from

> > > > Moon

> > > > > > (AK) &

> > > > > > > > > > 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's chart, rahu

> is

> > > with

> > > > Sun

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's effects...all of

> which

> > > > point to

> > > > > > > > > > dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house and

> ketu

> > > can

> > > > give

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's effect, if at

> all,

> > > > was

> > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > indirect, and he was not the killer.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-03

> (2:05:32

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-21

> (8:49:14

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-18

> (12:04:47

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-20

> (12:18:02

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> > > (11:08:26

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> (12:47:04

> > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I think what stands out is the fact that the dasa

> of

> > > the

> > > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > conjoined Moon brought about death. I think their

> mind

> > > > > > willed the

> > > > > > > > > > death.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

> > > > > > > > unrelated/unassociated

> > > > > > > > > > with itself? I request you to consider the above

> > > > objectively.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I will talk about the other charts/issues in my

> next

> > > > mail.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

> > > > > > > > > > > I do not know where you find Mars strong as a

> planet

> > > in

> > > > > > > > > > debilitation in

> > > > > > > > > > > Navamsha gives results of debility even when in

> > > > exaltation

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > rasi

> > > > > > > > > > > chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane smritam

> has

> > > > > > already

> > > > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > > > > mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered

> Mars/Venus

> > > in

> > > > > > Thakur's

> > > > > > > > > > chart because they are debilitated. Please go

> through

> > > my

> > > > > > message

> > > > > > > > > > again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

> > > > > > > > > > > aware of his revolutionary background and that

> he

> > > was

> > > > > > editor

> > > > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > > > paper

> > > > > > > > > > > "Vande Mataram" not much known for its soft

> language.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Same is the case with strong Malefics giving

> P.M.

> > > > Yogas.

> > > > > > Every

> > > > > > > > > > graha is

> > > > > > > > > > > capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga

> attributed

> > > to

> > > > it,

> > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > very

> > > > > > > > > > > least. It would only be naive to imagine they

> would

> > > > all

> > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > identical

> > > > > > > > > > > results as indicated by Parashara or all with

> Pancha

> > > > > > > > Mahapurusha

> > > > > > > > > > Yoga

> > > > > > > > > > > would only rule over different parts of India

> > > (barring

> > > > > > Saturn),

> > > > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > > > because the sage said so. The sages gave us

> > > principles

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > expected us

> > > > > > > > > > > to apply them to real life horoscope using

> Viveka.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I would gladly give you the shloka giving the

> > > > reference to

> > > > > > > > > > > "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old classic

> > > > respected

> > > > > > > > amongst

> > > > > > > > > > > astrologers, but as you do not seem to accept

> > > anything

> > > > that

> > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > not fit

> > > > > > > > > > > in with what, you think. is said by Dr. Raman,

> it

> > > > would be

> > > > > > an

> > > > > > > > > > exercise

> > > > > > > > > > > in futility. should you yet want the shloka I

> would

> > > of

> > > > > > course

> > > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > glad to

> > > > > > > > > > > give it to you.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave namah

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > You seem to be disagreeing with Shri B.V.

> Raman

> > > that

> > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > planets,

> > > > > > > > > > > > whether malefic or benefics give good results,

> > > while

> > > > weak

> > > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > > > give bad results. Perhaps you also disagree

> about

> > > > strong

> > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it contrary to

> > > what

> > > > all

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > jyotish

> > > > > > > > > > > > texts teach?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Then, here are a few examples, where I find

> that

> > > > strong

> > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > have neither made the natives krura nor that

> their

> > > > > > > > significations

> > > > > > > > > > > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna and

> mars in

> > > > 5th

> > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in lagna.

> > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th house

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted Saturn

> (9H)

> > > and

> > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > (4H).

> > > > > > > > > > Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > and Venus are also exalted in rasi, while

> > > > debilitated in

> > > > > > > > navamsa.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, can you give me the reference

> for "vipareetam

> > > > shaneH

> > > > > > > > > > sritam"?

> > > > > > > > > > > > Does it, by any chance, refer to Saturn's

> > > placement

> > > > in

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > 8th

> > > > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > being beneficial?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I am happy that you agree strong Saturn gives

> good

> > > > > > results.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me from where the saying is

> because i

> > > > would

> > > > > > > > like to

> > > > > > > > > > > > read it up myself and understand.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46@

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46%40.co.uk>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Krura planets the saying is, that

> with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength the Krura grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more Krura (Maha-krura) and the

> > > shubha

> > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more shubha.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Shani is more krura when weak and

> > > > beneficial

> > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > less krura when

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong "Viparitama shaneH smritam".

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My sun dasa started when I was 9 years

> > > old,

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ended when I was 15

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > years old. How come you didn't notice

> the

> > > > second

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > part? I was old

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough to understand the difference

> between

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > success and failure, I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guess!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you agree that Rahu is

> giving

> > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results, and those

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are exceptionally good, then it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically follows that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun is strong in my chart because

> > > according

> > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri B.V Raman, evil

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planets, especially when weak, give

> bad

> > > > results

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (vide "a catechism

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of astrology"), while strong planets,

> even

> > > if

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evil, give good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. If my Sun were weak, he

> wouldn't

> > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving such good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Mercury is hopelessly combust

> and

> > > > inferior

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in shadbala

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength, the major results of Dharma

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karmadhipathi yoga are also

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > given by Sun, because according to "300

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combinations" of Sri

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman, a planet with higher shadbala

> is

> > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > likely to give the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of a yoga.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Karna, I request you to read

> the

> > > > Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parva of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mahabharata again. When he died, the

> > > nature

> > > > bowed

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in grief, because

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > he's one of the noblest persons in

> > > > Mahabharata.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even the episode you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted happened because Parashurama

> would

> > > > teach

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only Brahmins and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna desperately wanted to learn

> > > > dhanurvidya

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashurama so

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he can support Duryodhana. Deceit

> is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly punishable and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did pay dearly. But it's to be

> borne

> > > > in

> > > > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that whatever

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did was only to please

> Duryodhana,

> > > his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dearest friend. Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did not gain anything personally.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the 3rd house from 8th

> house

> > > (I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think there was a typo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at your end). In the natural zodiac,

> the

> > > 10

> > > > th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sign, being the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cardinal earth sign, represents

> > > > south /dakshina

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disha. South is the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction ruled by Yama, the lord of

> > > death,

> > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > represents burial grounds. So, the

> Rudras

> > > > > > (Saturn,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Mars) are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong in south. Also, Sun resides in

> > > south

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > starts his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > northern voyage from here. So he has

> > > digbala

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did clarify that when I referred to

> > > Surya

> > > > as

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karma saakshi, it's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only to his status as antaraatma and

> not

> > > as a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deity. Perhaps this

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escaped your attention.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my last post on the subject.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

> 40>,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were too young for the results

> of

> > > the

> > > > dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to manifest,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is good news that your father had

> > > > promotions

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prizes/accolades during that time.

> It is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting to know you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > got

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these results at a young age of 9 or

> so

> > > as

> > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is when Sun dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > operative. I am relieved you did not

> > > have

> > > > any

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > health problems in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > March-August 1970 period.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But we are talking about Rahu and

> Rahu

> > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give results of Sun

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prominently, by conjunction, as you

> > > > guessed but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also that of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You have a Dharmakarmaadhipati yoga

> > > after

> > > > all)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that is why I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for understanding Sun its dasha

> instead

> > > of

> > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha needs to be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analyzed.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury is malefic not because I say

> so

> > > but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because Jyotish says

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mercury is malefic when conjunct a

> papa

> > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and he is conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the apex of Artha

> trikona

> > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly involved with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts to earn money. Though

> claimed to

> > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana/burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground, it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 4th from ayush sthana (8th) and

> its

> > > > home

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is why affliction

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can give death. But 8th is more

> > > popularly

> > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mrityu sthana and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th is called Smashana. If it is

> really

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana why would it be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karma sthana and why would Sun be at

> its

> > > > most

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brilliant there?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not say he can not represent

> water

> > > > bodies

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in temple, but not

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My Sun dasa was excellent too. My

> > > father

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > received promotion(s),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > school/college days were great and

> i

> > > > received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wide acclaim/prizes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for my ability in creative

> writing,

> > > > Veena,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz contests etc,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from studies. So, for a student, I

> > > guess

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's excellent!!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you justify this, if Sun

> were

> > > > weak?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahu is certainly

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the yogakaraka results, but being

> in

> > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house and being

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun, don't you think Rahu is also

> > > giving

> > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of Sun? You

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said that mercury is malefic and

> > > heavily

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combust too:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1th house also represent burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground/smashaana. Is that a place

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for attachment?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra represents all water

> bodies,

> > > so

> > > > why

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't he represent

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temple tank?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated ===

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best

> spam

> > > > > > protection

> > > > > > > > > > around

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> <>

> > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > > < <>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > > < <>>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

> ----

> > > --

> > > > ----

> > > > > > ----

> > > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > > 268.11.7/435 -

> > > >

> > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > > 8/31/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

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

> ----

> > > --

> > > > ----

> > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> 268.12.2/441 -

> > > > Release

> > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > 9/7/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

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

> ----

> > > --

> > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

> > > > Release

> > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > ________

> > > > > > > > > Try the all-new Mail. "The New Version is

> > > radically

> > > > > > easier

> > > > > > > > to use" – The Wall Street Journal

> > > > > > > > > http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

> > > > > > > > <http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html>

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

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

> ----

> > > --

> > > > ----

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

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

> Release

> > > >

> > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> _________

> > > > > > > Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling

> > > > worldwide

> > > > > > with voicemail http://uk.messenger.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep,

 

> Thanks for the reference on Aiteraya Upanishad.

 

Lakshmi: My pleasure:-))

 

>

> Rashis and tattwas as you know is the field.Same is body.Only the

> planets can enliven them.Rasa is important and is the

essence.Sarpa is

> connected to water and trees.Trees have watery essence namely the

> Sap.Thus Rahu is having a role for link.Moreover we have seen

Tantrik

> references regarding importance of rahu for sivashakthi aikya.

>

> Rahu is TIME serpent and hence is part of TIME/SPACE itself.Pull

> mentioned was the effect,and the seed or source is Soul/Mind

> itself.Necessary energy is obtained through the movement or

> progression of Sun/Moon.When Sun/Moon merges into ONE everything

else

> disappears.As it is a Chaaya Graha it cannot cast any drishti like

the

> other

> seven.Throught flux it can influence conjoining grahas as well as

> extract/absorb Rashi qualities.Also as you know reversal of

essence is

> the beginning.Kindly link it with kundalini as sarpa and reversal.

 

Lakshmi: I basically think that Rahu and Ketu are energies, pointing

in opposing directions. Rahu points downwards and Ketu points

upwards. I have always related Rahu-Ketu to kundalini and written

about them extensively in my articles....about how Rahu-Ketu come

together in some of the higher vargas.

 

For material purposes Rahu is exalted in Taurus, along with Moon,

:--), so he does influence attachments, as you very rightly say,

while Ketu has the opposite effect. "The mind is its own place, and

in itself, can make heaven of Hell, and a hell of Heaven."

I think Sanjy ji's lecture can be found on atri-SJC site.

 

You really love music, don't you?:--)) Venus rules all Beauty, which

in the higher sense is Truth itself. Btw, Naada is an attribute of

akasha, of Jupiter!

 

I agree with you that any epiphanic moment in which one can

transcend oneself and glimpse the Infinite, is a moment with

God...like the one when Newton spotted the fateful apple falling, or

when Einstein stumbled upon the relativity theory or the one when

Arjuna was granted vishwaroopa sandarshanam!!

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

 

 

> Also in another mail you have mentioned about Jupiter and

Ananda.True

> wisdom is ananda and hence Guru is karaka.Shukra gives

> Paramananda.Poets have said Anandam Anandanandam Jagadanandam

> sangeetham!!!.The bliss, Union ,confluence ,continous flow,which

music

> can bestow is beyond words.Also continous integrated consciousness

is

> Brahmam.Shukra is for finer wisdom and Guru for broad wisdom.Nada

can

> permeate and open even the subtlest and finer openings within us.

>

> Not only music ,if you can absorb the rasa oozing from the bhavas

on

> to which Padma subrahmaniam is merging,one can get closer.When

Sachin

> Tendulkar or Brian Lara sights a ball in advance,send a stimulus to

> brain,transfer the signals to hand/feet and body,and play a stroke

> with timing and perfect balance,and everything happening within

split

> of a second - It is Aananda for them !!!.In other words

> perfection,continous perfection is HIM.If we can union with him

even

> for a second Ananda Rasa Oozes.

>

> Thanks

> Pradeep

>

>

>

> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> >

> > Om Gurave Namah

> >

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > I am glad that we are converging on real learning now. As the

Sage

> > Parashara summed up, all planets/beings are but manifestations

of

> > the supreme spirit. Have you heard the amazing lecture given by

> > Sanjay ji on Varaha avatara (Rahu) and how it

governs/facilitates

> > birth (surfacing) of the body(prithvi)from the water (amniotic

> > fluid?).

> >

> > Just one point. The body/mind/faculties already exist before the

> > soul enters it, animating all. I request you to read Aitareya

> > upanishad for greater understanding of this concept.

> >

> > That's a lovely point about Rahu representing the intersecting

point

> > of Atma and ManaH. However, is pull/attachment represented by

Rahu,

> > who doesn't have a body and lacks the necessary mass to cause

the

> > pull? It's Prithvi tattwa which causes attraction(Taurus-earth

sign-

> > natural 2nd house, which governs attraction) and its the jala

tattwa

> > which causes attachment (Cancer). So, all these

pulls/attractions

> > and attachments are caused by interplay of body and mind.... and

not

> > by soul.

> >

> > Chandrasekhar ji might feel that since jala tattwa represents

> > moksha, it can not indicate attachments. I request you to go

through

> > Lalithopaakhyanam to understand how "rasa" is vital to

> > attraction/attachment/creation and happiness.

> >

> > But I do agree that Rahu tends to magnify everything and take

over

> > others' significations to such an extent that we forget who is

the

> > real karaka and attribute all these to Rahu.

> >

> > Aham-ahanta is a huge and difficult topic and certainly not to

be

> > attempted when one's (me, ofcourse)feeling extremely sleepy. I

will

> > try to type out my understanding tomorrow if my sons permit me

to

> > touch the computer, otherwise, we'll meet on Monday.

> >

> > So, good night and happy weekend:--))

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

> >

> >

> > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > >

> > > I humbly feel, as in essence we are the same, we are mutually

> > learning

> > > to cross the ocean of samsara,which is the very purpose of

taking

> > body.

> > > I am scribbling something based on the gains obtained during

> > guidance/

> > > discussion from/with Chandrashekhar ji,you and other learned

> > > members.Read the mail from Inderjit ji on EGO.Kindly check if

we

> > are

> > > on the right track.

> > >

> > > Aaditya Bhagawan or Sun is KalaSwaroopa.He creates Time.He is

> > karaka

> > > for our lagna/self and gives us eyesight,paurusha and is the

subtle

> > > core in us.Let us Pray and Thank HIM for all the Light -

sustaining

> > > life. We are advocates, neither for Rahu nor for Sun.Let their

> > > strength,in our chart,not create any bias.

> > >

> > > It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -nothing

> > belongs

> > > to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there is a

> > > separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called EGO

or

> > > Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For example a

King

> > > might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc

> > resulting in

> > > Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

> > >

> > > Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

> > >

> > > Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for Atman.Though

> > Atman is

> > > the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the

purpose of

> > > knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but part

of

> > > Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to

> > superimposition

> > > of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per

Sankara.The

> > > jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first entry as

far

> > as

> > > humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma as

well

> > > follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual feeling of

> > > me/mine is ''í''.

> > >

> > >

> > > As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have Death

and

> > > Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact between

> > > atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us

clutch

> > on

> > > to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus

intoxication

> > is

> > > nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is

enhancing

> > the

> > > already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just keeping

> > > together the already manifested superimposition(Atma/Mind).The

> > level

> > > of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the

> > strength of

> > > moon and further associations.

> > >

> > > Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus does

not

> > make

> > > it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not

because

> > of

> > > Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before realization

nor

> > > after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma identifies

itself

> > > with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in

other

> > words

> > > the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

> > >

> > > Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should think

of

> > feet

> > > through Meena/Rahu.

> > >

> > > Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is

EGO ,what is

> > > pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me

what is

> > > Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated illusion

in

> > our

> > > context?.

> > >

> > > In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya

(which is

> > > the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but part

of

> > > him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a

catalyst or

> > > clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

> > >

> > > If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still(if

it

> > is

> > > possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind of

> > > Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

> > >

> > > Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space is

created

> > > and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into picture).Brahman and

> > > Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards

> > understanding

> > > the sublime and far TRUTH.

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

> > > > Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting

> > that "ego" is

> > > > found only in some people. If we interpret dispassionately,

> > perhaps

> > > > Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego (

> > necessary

> > > > for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being, as

much

> > as

> > > > soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't find

us

> > > > fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego, you

have

> > > > ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it, perhaps

in

> > > > different degrees.

> > > >

> > > > How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to some

> > > > people!! How wrong was i to think that we are

exceptions! "Ego"

> > is

> > > > part of the natural state of every individual...like the

> > kundalini

> > > > residing in mooladhara of every one.

> > > >

> > > > Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in

dissolving

> > this

> > > > separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a state

of

> > > > Realization.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet exhilerating

> > > > understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > >

> > > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > > >

> > > > > Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

> > > > > > the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the

above

> > and

> > > > > result

> > > > > > in dukham.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma

reference

> > was

> > > > not

> > > > > chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and

certified

> > to

> > > > be

> > > > > impeccable.

> > > > >

> > > > > Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that Saturn

gives

> > > > > contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not recall

> > > > > Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it,

please

> > let

> > > > me

> > > > > know.

> > > > >

> > > > > I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not say

> > > > anything

> > > > > about Rahu representing "mada". But have they explicitly

said

> > any

> > > > > thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not drawing

> > > > convoluted

> > > > > conclusions then?

> > > > >

> > > > > Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it when

it

> > > > doesn't?

> > > > >

> > > > > Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing either

Sun

> > or

> > > > > Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said that

Rahu

> > is

> > > > > also capable of giving great spirituality when involved in

> > such

> > > > > yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these days

is

> > for

> > > > > fair treatment of all planets.

> > > > >

> > > > > > Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the

context.Why

> > > > Rahu

> > > > > is

> > > > > > just one among the shad ripus?Why not

> > lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

> > > > Rahu

> > > > > is

> > > > > > not any of these.He makes us have all these.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator

of "I"- a

> > > > false

> > > > > feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of ego

(as

> > > > > defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This feeling

is

> > also

> > > > > the basis of the shadripus which are based on one

individual

> > being

> > > > > different from other.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sun called as Atma karaka

> > > > > > is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he

enters

> > the

> > > > > body

> > > > > > he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

> > > > taking ,until

> > > > > self

> > > > > > realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham mentioning

about

> > > > > individual

> > > > > > soul and its plight.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling

> > of ''I''.It

> > > > is

> > > > > just

> > > > > > our assumption.

> > > > >

> > > > > Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you

tell me

> > > > > why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual lordship by

> > Saturn

> > > > > and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma

(Saturn)

> > and

> > > > > unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth

takes

> > place

> > > > > because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel

trapped

> > in a

> > > > > body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

> > > > >

> > > > > Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time?

Does he

> > > > cause

> > > > > day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's because

he

> > causes

> > > > > the interminable birth cycle.

> > > > >

> > > > > According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-

> > mails, "ego"

> > > > is

> > > > > a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself have

said

> > > > > that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding us

giving

> > us

> > > > a

> > > > > smoky/obscurant idea".

> > > > >

> > > > > I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this

together,

> > > > please

> > > > > tell me if Rahu does not give a

illusiory/intoxicated/false

> > idea

> > > > of

> > > > > oneself.

> > > > >

> > > > > Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i

understand

> > the

> > > > > way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have

nothing

> > > > > against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is

bringing

> > me

> > > > > immense spiritual benefits, like the present discussion:--

))

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks

> > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that the

> > shloka

> > > > from

> > > > > > > Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

> > > > > > > individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

> > > > intoxication

> > > > > as

> > > > > > > an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication" belong

in

> > that

> > > > > > > context, in that group?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I do not think either of you responded to that.

perhaps

> > you

> > > > > missed

> > > > > > > it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Can i have your response(s) please?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > , Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada

does

> > mean

> > > > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > > > or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to

kaamana

> > > > which

> > > > > > > means

> > > > > > > > desires for things possessed by others. That is what

> > Asteya,

> > > > > one

> > > > > > > of the

> > > > > > > > Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > We are talking about auspiciousness or other wise of

the

> > > > > dormant

> > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can be

> > > > > misinterpreted

> > > > > > > if

> > > > > > > > one wants to do that. But that does not serve any

> > purpose. I

> > > > > would

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and Avidya

> > related to

> > > > > Maa.

> > > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > > not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a shloka,

to

> > > > support

> > > > > your

> > > > > > > > proposition that dormant Kundalini is inauspicious

and

> > the

> > > > > > > awakened

> > > > > > > > Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already

posted

> > the

> > > > way

> > > > > my

> > > > > > > > generation has been taught to accept an argument, so

I

> > shall

> > > > > not

> > > > > > > repeat

> > > > > > > > it here.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > But I will not resort to conjectures and would like

to

> > quote

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > > Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant

> > Kundalini.

> > > > > Being

> > > > > > > > graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have to

> > translate

> > > > > it

> > > > > > > for you.

> > > > > > > > Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

> > > > > > > > ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

> > > > > > > > devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

> > > > > > > > devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

> > > > > > > > mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

> > > > > > > > mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

> > > > > > > > sa me mat&mnuiSwta k…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

> > > > > > > > sä me mätåmanusthitä

kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I am sure you must have some quote to support your

> > > > contention.

> > > > > I

> > > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > like to see the shloka, as against conjectures, so

that

> > I

> > > > can

> > > > > > > improve

> > > > > > > > upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I can understand your reluctance to support your

> > > > propositions

> > > > > with

> > > > > > > > suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you by

> > pointing

> > > > > out

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and Rahu

> > > > > combinations

> > > > > > > in two

> > > > > > > > different chart as stand out combinations only.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and if I

> > have

> > > > done

> > > > > so

> > > > > > > > inadvertently I crave your pardon.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha (anger),

lobha

> > > > > (greed),

> > > > > > > moha

> > > > > > > > > (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and maatsarya

> > > > (jealousy)

> > > > > > > > > If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply

among

> > the

> > > > > > > > > shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is

> > intoxicated/drunk

> > > > with

> > > > > > > > > power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya swaroopini"

and

> > > > correct

> > > > > > > > > appreciation of Mother includes understanding of

both

> > > > > facets. As

> > > > > > > > > Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be

routed

> > > > > towards

> > > > > > > good

> > > > > > > > > deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the

same?

> > The

> > > > > wisdom,

> > > > > > > > > required to put this immense shakti to good use,

is

> > > > > represented

> > > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > > Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati,

wisdom

> > and

> > > > > power, is

> > > > > > > > > said to be auspicious because it ensures the

> > > > > correct/judicious

> > > > > > > end

> > > > > > > > > use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti is

very

> > very

> > > > > > > > > important.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and

krura. I

> > > > also

> > > > > > > always

> > > > > > > > > said all planets, including Jupiter, can give

malefic

> > > > > results, if

> > > > > > > > > they are functionally empowered to do so. You can

> > refer to

> > > > > all my

> > > > > > > > > previous mails to confirm this.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Sir, Truth is much more important than winning or

> > losing an

> > > > > > > > > argument. All discussions must proceed as an

> > exploration

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > celebration of Truth. When this is not the case, I

see

> > no

> > > > > > > purpose in

> > > > > > > > > continuing these discussions.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > <%40>,

Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age are

> > > > operating

> > > > > at

> > > > > > > > > different

> > > > > > > > > > levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not die

> > young.

> > > > So

> > > > > > > please

> > > > > > > > > do not

> > > > > > > > > > try to mix the issues. If you have read

Swamiji's

> > > > > biography you

> > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > find that he fell sick many times despite of

> > apparent

> > > > > robust

> > > > > > > > > physique.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart

confirms

> > > > with

> > > > > his

> > > > > > > > > being

> > > > > > > > > > capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did not

know

> > I

> > > > was

> > > > > > > expected

> > > > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > analyze the entire chart. By the way if there is

a

> > Kuja

> > > > > dosha

> > > > > > > how

> > > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do not

> > bring

> > > > our

> > > > > > > > > devotion to

> > > > > > > > > > Lord Rama (and we both have that) into

astrological

> > > > > analysis of

> > > > > > > > > his chart.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Bringing in the dashas when the discussions are

on

> > the

> > > > > effects

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > will only lead the discussion to no where. The

two

> > have

> > > > to

> > > > > be

> > > > > > > seen

> > > > > > > > > > separately as we are not trying to time an event

but

> > > > only

> > > > > > > trying

> > > > > > > > > to find

> > > > > > > > > > what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you have

> > perhaps

> > > > > > > forgotten

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha in

that

> > > > > perspective

> > > > > > > > > and let

> > > > > > > > > > me know your views. And if by the way you read

my

> > mail,

> > > > I

> > > > > did

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > say

> > > > > > > > > > anything about mars being killer for him, only

that

> > it

> > > > > gave him

> > > > > > > > > Sarcoma

> > > > > > > > > > being 3rd lord.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Also could you explain why Sun being Atma and

always

> > > > > > > beneficent as

> > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > have claimed all along in the thread on the

topic,

> > did

> > > > its

> > > > > > > > > Mahadasha

> > > > > > > > > > prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > For example, remember that in Swami

> > Vivekananda's

> > > > > chart

> > > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > > lord of

> > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th occupying the lagna and causing a

> > powerful

> > > > Raj

> > > > > > > yoga. At

> > > > > > > > > > > the same

> > > > > > > > > > > > time if you thin how long the Swamiji lived,

you

> > may

> > > > > have

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > think

> > > > > > > > > > > again

> > > > > > > > > > > > about saying that it did not act as

Mahakrura.

> > Think

> > > > > about

> > > > > > > > > what it

> > > > > > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > > > > to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also, before

> > declaring

> > > > > that it

> > > > > > > > > became

> > > > > > > > > > > > shubha or less malefic.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an icchamrityu

and

> > > > looking

> > > > > at

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > dass

> > > > > > > > > > > operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that he

> > passed

> > > > > away in

> > > > > > > Jup-

> > > > > > > > > Ven-

> > > > > > > > > > > Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-10

> > (3:59:13

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-27

> > (4:48:54

> > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-12

> > (10:43:55

> > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-07

> > (5:06:28

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-06

> > (2:29:24

> > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05

(1:27:03

> > am)

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus is

the

> > 2nd

> > > > lord

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > > > > and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is in

the

> > house

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > Venus

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > gives the results of Venus and Saturn is the

2nd

> > lord

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > lagna....all are marakas. the maraka

> > significations

> > > > are

> > > > > > > stronger

> > > > > > > > > > > from Moon, and it's the cause of his early

death.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I fail to see where Sun comes into all this.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting 7th

> > house,

> > > > > can

> > > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > > parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore the

> > influence

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > Saturn

> > > > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > > > > Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th

house? I

> > am

> > > > > sure

> > > > > > > even

> > > > > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > > > Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--))

but

> > > > without

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > raja

> > > > > > > > > > > yoga and the strong soul-level impact he

created

> > > > > wherever he

> > > > > > > > > went.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Or if you like look at what happened to the 7th

> > > > > > > > > > > > Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in the

7th

> > > > bhava.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think the

> > strong

> > > > > Mars in

> > > > > > > 7th

> > > > > > > > > > > gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You have

not

> > > > > commented

> > > > > > > on the

> > > > > > > > > > > exalted Saturn in 4th house.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > In each of the

> > > > > > > > > > > > example provided by you look at the bhava

that

> > the

> > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > occupy

> > > > > > > > > > > > (barring Saturn, for reasons already stated

in

> > > > > previous

> > > > > > > mail),

> > > > > > > > > > > without

> > > > > > > > > > > > looking at the charts as belonging to great

> > people,

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > > > > up

> > > > > > > > > > > > your mind as to the truth or otherwise of

what I

> > > > said.

> > > > > Did

> > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > know

> > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi died following a malignant

> > sarcoma

> > > > of

> > > > > left

> > > > > > > hand

> > > > > > > > > > > and Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in his

chart,

> > in

> > > > > > > > > exaltation. Do

> > > > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > > think Mars gave him benevolent results?

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to examine

the

> > > > > following

> > > > > > > dasa

> > > > > > > > > > > sequences with an open mind. Sun is the 3rd

lord

> > from

> > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > (AK) &

> > > > > > > > > > > 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's chart,

rahu

> > is

> > > > with

> > > > > Sun

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's effects...all of

> > which

> > > > > point to

> > > > > > > > > > > dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house and

> > ketu

> > > > can

> > > > > give

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's effect, if

at

> > all,

> > > > > was

> > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > indirect, and he was not the killer.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-03

> > (2:05:32

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-21

> > (8:49:14

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-18

> > (12:04:47

> > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-20

> > (12:18:02

> > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> > > > (11:08:26

> > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> > (12:47:04

> > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I think what stands out is the fact that the

dasa

> > of

> > > > the

> > > > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > conjoined Moon brought about death. I think

their

> > mind

> > > > > > > willed the

> > > > > > > > > > > death.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

> > > > > > > > > unrelated/unassociated

> > > > > > > > > > > with itself? I request you to consider the

above

> > > > > objectively.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I will talk about the other charts/issues in

my

> > next

> > > > > mail.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

> > > > > > > > > > > > I do not know where you find Mars strong as

a

> > planet

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > debilitation in

> > > > > > > > > > > > Navamsha gives results of debility even when

in

> > > > > exaltation

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > rasi

> > > > > > > > > > > > chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane

smritam

> > has

> > > > > > > already

> > > > > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered

> > Mars/Venus

> > > > in

> > > > > > > Thakur's

> > > > > > > > > > > chart because they are debilitated. Please go

> > through

> > > > my

> > > > > > > message

> > > > > > > > > > > again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

> > > > > > > > > > > > aware of his revolutionary background and

that

> > he

> > > > was

> > > > > > > editor

> > > > > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > > > > paper

> > > > > > > > > > > > "Vande Mataram" not much known for its soft

> > language.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Same is the case with strong Malefics giving

> > P.M.

> > > > > Yogas.

> > > > > > > Every

> > > > > > > > > > > graha is

> > > > > > > > > > > > capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga

> > attributed

> > > > to

> > > > > it,

> > > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > very

> > > > > > > > > > > > least. It would only be naive to imagine

they

> > would

> > > > > all

> > > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > > identical

> > > > > > > > > > > > results as indicated by Parashara or all

with

> > Pancha

> > > > > > > > > Mahapurusha

> > > > > > > > > > > Yoga

> > > > > > > > > > > > would only rule over different parts of

India

> > > > (barring

> > > > > > > Saturn),

> > > > > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > > > > because the sage said so. The sages gave us

> > > > principles

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > expected us

> > > > > > > > > > > > to apply them to real life horoscope using

> > Viveka.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I would gladly give you the shloka giving

the

> > > > > reference to

> > > > > > > > > > > > "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old

classic

> > > > > respected

> > > > > > > > > amongst

> > > > > > > > > > > > astrologers, but as you do not seem to

accept

> > > > anything

> > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > > not fit

> > > > > > > > > > > > in with what, you think. is said by Dr.

Raman,

> > it

> > > > > would be

> > > > > > > an

> > > > > > > > > > > exercise

> > > > > > > > > > > > in futility. should you yet want the shloka

I

> > would

> > > > of

> > > > > > > course

> > > > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > glad to

> > > > > > > > > > > > give it to you.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > You seem to be disagreeing with Shri B.V.

> > Raman

> > > > that

> > > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > > planets,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > whether malefic or benefics give good

results,

> > > > while

> > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > > > > give bad results. Perhaps you also

disagree

> > about

> > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > > giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it

contrary to

> > > > what

> > > > > all

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > jyotish

> > > > > > > > > > > > > texts teach?

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, here are a few examples, where I

find

> > that

> > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > > have neither made the natives krura nor

that

> > their

> > > > > > > > > significations

> > > > > > > > > > > > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna and

> > mars in

> > > > > 5th

> > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in

lagna.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted Saturn

> > (9H)

> > > > and

> > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > (4H).

> > > > > > > > > > > Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > > and Venus are also exalted in rasi, while

> > > > > debilitated in

> > > > > > > > > navamsa.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, can you give me the reference

> > for "vipareetam

> > > > > shaneH

> > > > > > > > > > > sritam"?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it, by any chance, refer to Saturn's

> > > > placement

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > 8th

> > > > > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > being beneficial?

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > I am happy that you agree strong Saturn

gives

> > good

> > > > > > > results.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me from where the saying is

> > because i

> > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > like to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > read it up myself and understand.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46@

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46%

40.co.uk>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Krura planets the saying is,

that

> > with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength the Krura grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more Krura (Maha-krura) and

the

> > > > shubha

> > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more shubha.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Shani is more krura when weak

and

> > > > > beneficial

> > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > less krura when

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong "Viparitama shaneH smritam".

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My sun dasa started when I was 9

years

> > > > old,

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ended when I was 15

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > years old. How come you didn't

notice

> > the

> > > > > second

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > part? I was old

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough to understand the

difference

> > between

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > success and failure, I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guess!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you agree that Rahu is

> > giving

> > > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results, and those

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are exceptionally good,

then it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically follows that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun is strong in my chart because

> > > > according

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri B.V Raman, evil

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planets, especially when weak,

give

> > bad

> > > > > results

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (vide "a catechism

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of astrology"), while strong

planets,

> > even

> > > > if

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evil, give good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. If my Sun were weak, he

> > wouldn't

> > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving such good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Mercury is hopelessly

combust

> > and

> > > > > inferior

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in shadbala

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength, the major results of

Dharma

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karmadhipathi yoga are also

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > given by Sun, because according

to "300

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combinations" of Sri

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman, a planet with higher

shadbala

> > is

> > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > likely to give the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of a yoga.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Karna, I request you to

read

> > the

> > > > > Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parva of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mahabharata again. When he died,

the

> > > > nature

> > > > > bowed

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in grief, because

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > he's one of the noblest persons in

> > > > > Mahabharata.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even the episode you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted happened because

Parashurama

> > would

> > > > > teach

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only Brahmins and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna desperately wanted to learn

> > > > > dhanurvidya

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashurama so

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he can support Duryodhana.

Deceit

> > is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly punishable and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did pay dearly. But it's to

be

> > borne

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that whatever

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did was only to please

> > Duryodhana,

> > > > his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dearest friend. Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did not gain anything personally.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the 3rd house from

8th

> > house

> > > > (I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think there was a typo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at your end). In the natural

zodiac,

> > the

> > > > 10

> > > > > th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sign, being the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cardinal earth sign, represents

> > > > > south /dakshina

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disha. South is the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction ruled by Yama, the lord

of

> > > > death,

> > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > represents burial grounds. So, the

> > Rudras

> > > > > > > (Saturn,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Mars) are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong in south. Also, Sun resides

in

> > > > south

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > starts his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > northern voyage from here. So he

has

> > > > digbala

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did clarify that when I referred

to

> > > > Surya

> > > > > as

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karma saakshi, it's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only to his status as antaraatma

and

> > not

> > > > as a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deity. Perhaps this

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escaped your attention.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my last post on the

subject.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

 

> > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

> > 40>,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were too young for the

results

> > of

> > > > the

> > > > > dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to manifest,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is good news that your father

had

> > > > > promotions

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prizes/accolades during that

time.

> > It is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting to know you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > got

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these results at a young age of

9 or

> > so

> > > > as

> > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is when Sun dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > operative. I am relieved you did

not

> > > > have

> > > > > any

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > health problems in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > March-August 1970 period.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But we are talking about Rahu

and

> > Rahu

> > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give results of Sun

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prominently, by conjunction, as

you

> > > > > guessed but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also that of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You have a Dharmakarmaadhipati

yoga

> > > > after

> > > > > all)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that is why I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for understanding Sun its dasha

> > instead

> > > > of

> > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha needs to be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analyzed.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury is malefic not because I

say

> > so

> > > > but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because Jyotish says

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mercury is malefic when conjunct

a

> > papa

> > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and he is conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the apex of Artha

> > trikona

> > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly involved with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts to earn money. Though

> > claimed to

> > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana/burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground, it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 4th from ayush sthana (8th)

and

> > its

> > > > > home

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is why affliction

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can give death. But 8th is more

> > > > popularly

> > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mrityu sthana and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th is called Smashana. If it

is

> > really

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana why would it be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karma sthana and why would Sun

be at

> > its

> > > > > most

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brilliant there?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not say he can not

represent

> > water

> > > > > bodies

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in temple, but not

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My Sun dasa was excellent too.

My

> > > > father

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > received promotion(s),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > school/college days were great

and

> > i

> > > > > received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wide acclaim/prizes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for my ability in creative

> > writing,

> > > > > Veena,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz contests etc,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from studies. So, for a

student, I

> > > > guess

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's excellent!!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you justify this, if

Sun

> > were

> > > > > weak?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahu is certainly

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the yogakaraka results, but

being

> > in

> > > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house and being

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun, don't you think Rahu is

also

> > > > giving

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of Sun? You

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said that mercury is malefic

and

> > > > heavily

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combust too:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1th house also represent burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground/smashaana. Is that a place

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for attachment?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra represents all water

> > bodies,

> > > > so

> > > > > why

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't he represent

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temple tank?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated ===

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the

best

> > spam

> > > > > > > protection

> > > > > > > > > > > around

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > <>

> > > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > > > < <>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > <

<>

> > > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > > < <>

> > > > > > > > > < <>>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

----

> > ----

> > > > --

> > > > > ----

> > > > > > > ----

> > > > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > > > 268.11.7/435 -

> > > > >

> > > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > 8/31/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have

been

> > > > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

----

> > ----

> > > > --

> > > > > ----

> > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > 268.12.2/441 -

> > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > 9/7/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been

> > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

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

----

> > ----

> > > > --

> > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

268.12.2/442 -

> > > > > Release

> > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > ________

> > > > > > > > > > Try the all-new Mail. "The New Version is

> > > > radically

> > > > > > > easier

> > > > > > > > > to use" – The Wall Street Journal

> > > > > > > > > > http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

> > > > > > > > > <http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html>

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

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

----

> > ----

> > > > --

> > > > > ----

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

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

> > Release

> > > > >

> > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > _________

> > > > > > > > Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC

calling

> > > > > worldwide

> > > > > > > with voicemail http://uk.messenger.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Laxmi ji,

 

Yes - In my view - rahu deals with ego in various modes (depending upon planetary placements/associations).

 

Re aristocracy - it needs to be distinguished from "royalty". It has typical character - that they "hate" equality. so sort of "aham". But for such natives - another pointer in their chart - i.e. royal success.So, rahu blesses them that "distinct" success. Ofcourse - it got to be read with other planets/Dcharts/Arudha etc.

 

regards / Prafulla Gang

 

Our circumstances answer to our expectations and the demand of our natures.

 

************************************************

 

 

>

> b_lakshmi_ramesh

> Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:38:26 -0000

>

> Re: Humility & learning lessons of life/Lakshmi

> ji

>

> Om Gurave Namah

>

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> As I promised yesterday, i am jotting down my nascent, quite recent

> (:--)) and perhaps highly confused understanding of "aham" and hope

> for corrections, especially from respected Ranjanji and Prafulla ji.

>

> As you have asked, who is "I" and what is "I", that gives rise to

> actions/reactions. It is not the body, because as the Chandala said

> to Shankara, body is jada and can not act on its own. Is it soul,

> but the Soul is actionless. so, aham can neither be body nor the

> soul.

>

> "aham" is the inherent quality/ability of a being, on which basis it

> is distiguished/reckoned separate from others. For example, to name

> a few, Ocean /Water has the quality of ebb & flow, agni has the

> ability to burn, birds have the capacity to fly etc. These basic

> abilities distinguish them from others and give them an

> distinctive/individual identity (aham).

>

> Among birds also there must be certain features peculiar to certain

> species which set them apart from others. So is the case with

> animals and humans. Infact, it is the case with all the creation,

> which is slotted into various categories, though it's all emanated

> from the same seed/beeja. It's the bhedabhraanthi roopa jnaanam.

>

> Extending the same argument, perhaps it's the case with the

> different organs of the body too. They all have their appointed

> abilities which can not be swapped with others. Brain has the

> ability to coordinate all the processes happening in the body, while

> legs have the ability to transport the body. Neither can do the

> other's job and each has it's own place and importance.

>

> If legs accuse the "brain" of aristocracy/inflated ego because it

> has been accorded a higher/more prominent place in the body, is it

> correct/fair? Suppose all the organs in the body want to control the

> processes in the body, in the name of "samabhavana", will the body

> be able to function at all? The reverse also holds good:--))

>

> God has given all beings a distinctive "talent"/identity (ego), and

> how does this get manifested? It's through Shakti (ahanta), which is

> a transforming/interactive aspect of Brahman, different species are

> able to demonstrate/maintain their respective identities.

>

> But when we forget that we are part of the Supreme Soul, and mistake

> this temporary "address" as the real/permanent thing, the problems

> crop up, and as you said, various attachments / aberrations seep in.

>

> Then is the time for us to step on this illusion and push it down

> (however good it may be for material life), ruthlessly pierce the

> eye of attachment, so that the "jeeva" can understand that he's in

> the true sense "Trivikrama"!

>

> Rahu represents this "aham" because

>

> 1)it's a grey area:--))

>

> 2)it's the same principle, which is manifested differently in

> different beings, according to their species/categories. Similarly

> Rahu takes on the characteristics of the house lords/conjoined

> planets, and gives different results.

>

> 3)Also, Rahu represents "head" (including face, please!) which

> represents the main "identity" & ability of a person.

>

> I am sure i have missed out on many things. Hope i made at least

> some sense:--))

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>>> It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -nothing

>> belongs

>>> to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there is a

>>> separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called EGO or

>>> Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For example a

> King

>>> might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc

>> resulting in

>>> Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

>>>

>>> Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

>>>

>>> Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for Atman.Though

>> Atman is

>>> the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the purpose

> of

>>> knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but part of

>>> Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to

>> superimposition

>>> of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per Sankara.The

>>> jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first entry as

> far

>> as

>>> humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma as

> well

>>> follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual feeling of

>>> me/mine is ''í''.

>>>

>>>

>>> As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have Death and

>>> Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact between

>>> atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us

> clutch

>> on

>>> to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus

> intoxication

>> is

>>> nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is enhancing

>> the

>>> already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just keeping

>>> together the already manifested superimposition(Atma/Mind).The

>> level

>>> of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the

>> strength of

>>> moon and further associations.

>>>

>>> Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus does not

>> make

>>> it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not

> because

>> of

>>> Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before realization

> nor

>>> after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma identifies

> itself

>>> with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in other

>> words

>>> the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

>>>

>>> Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should think of

>> feet

>>> through Meena/Rahu.

>>>

>>> Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is EGO ,what

> is

>>> pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me what

> is

>>> Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated illusion

> in

>> our

>>> context?.

>>>

>>> In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya(which

> is

>>> the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but part of

>>> him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a catalyst

> or

>>> clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

>>>

>>> If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still(if

> it

>> is

>>> possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind of

>>> Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

>>>

>>> Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space is

> created

>>> and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into picture).Brahman and

>>> Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards

>> understanding

>>> the sublime and far TRUTH.

>>>

>>> Thanks

>>> Pradeep

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

>>> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Om Gurave Namah

>>>>

>>>> Namaste Pradeep,

>>>>

>>>> Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

>>>> Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting

>> that "ego" is

>>>> found only in some people. If we interpret dispassionately,

>> perhaps

>>>> Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego (

>> necessary

>>>> for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being, as

> much

>> as

>>>> soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't find us

>>>> fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego, you

> have

>>>> ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it, perhaps in

>>>> different degrees.

>>>>

>>>> How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to some

>>>> people!! How wrong was i to think that we are

> exceptions! "Ego"

>> is

>>>> part of the natural state of every individual...like the

>> kundalini

>>>> residing in mooladhara of every one.

>>>>

>>>> Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in

> dissolving

>> this

>>>> separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a state

> of

>>>> Realization.

>>>>

>>>> Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet exhilerating

>>>> understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

>>>>

>>>> Regards,

>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

>>>> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> Om Gurave Namah

>>>>>

>>>>> Namaste Pradeep,

>>>>>

>>>>> Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

>>>>>> the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the above

>> and

>>>>> result

>>>>>> in dukham.

>>>>>

>>>>> Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma reference

>> was

>>>> not

>>>>> chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and

> certified

>> to

>>>> be

>>>>> impeccable.

>>>>>

>>>>> Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that Saturn

> gives

>>>>> contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not recall

>>>>> Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it, please

>> let

>>>> me

>>>>> know.

>>>>>

>>>>> I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not say

>>>> anything

>>>>> about Rahu representing "mada". But have they explicitly

> said

>> any

>>>>> thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not drawing

>>>> convoluted

>>>>> conclusions then?

>>>>>

>>>>> Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it when it

>>>> doesn't?

>>>>>

>>>>> Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing either

> Sun

>> or

>>>>> Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said that

> Rahu

>> is

>>>>> also capable of giving great spirituality when involved in

>> such

>>>>> yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these days

> is

>> for

>>>>> fair treatment of all planets.

>>>>>

>>>>>> Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the

> context.Why

>>>> Rahu

>>>>> is

>>>>>> just one among the shad ripus?Why not

>> lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

>>>> Rahu

>>>>> is

>>>>>> not any of these.He makes us have all these.

>>>>>

>>>>> Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator of "I"-

> a

>>>> false

>>>>> feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of ego (as

>>>>> defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This feeling is

>> also

>>>>> the basis of the shadripus which are based on one individual

>> being

>>>>> different from other.

>>>>>

>>>>> Sun called as Atma karaka

>>>>>> is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he

> enters

>> the

>>>>> body

>>>>>> he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

>>>> taking ,until

>>>>> self

>>>>>> realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham mentioning

> about

>>>>> individual

>>>>>> soul and its plight.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling

>> of ''I''.It

>>>> is

>>>>> just

>>>>>> our assumption.

>>>>>

>>>>> Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you tell

> me

>>>>> why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual lordship by

>> Saturn

>>>>> and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma

> (Saturn)

>> and

>>>>> unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth takes

>> place

>>>>> because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel

> trapped

>> in a

>>>>> body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

>>>>>

>>>>> Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time? Does

> he

>>>> cause

>>>>> day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's because he

>> causes

>>>>> the interminable birth cycle.

>>>>>

>>>>> According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-

>> mails, "ego"

>>>> is

>>>>> a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself have

> said

>>>>> that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding us

> giving

>> us

>>>> a

>>>>> smoky/obscurant idea".

>>>>>

>>>>> I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this

> together,

>>>> please

>>>>> tell me if Rahu does not give a illusiory/intoxicated/false

>> idea

>>>> of

>>>>> oneself.

>>>>>

>>>>> Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i

> understand

>> the

>>>>> way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have

> nothing

>>>>> against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is bringing

>> me

>>>>> immense spiritual benefits, like the present discussion:--))

>>>>>

>>>>> Regards,

>>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>> Thanks

>>>>>> Pradeep

>>>>>>

>>>>>> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

>>>>>> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Om Gurave Namah

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that the

>> shloka

>>>> from

>>>>>>> Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

>>>>>>> individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

>>>> intoxication

>>>>> as

>>>>>>> an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication" belong in

>> that

>>>>>>> context, in that group?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> I do not think either of you responded to that. perhaps

>> you

>>>>> missed

>>>>>>> it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Can i have your response(s) please?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Regards,

>>>>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> , Chandrashekhar

>>>>>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Dear Divine Lakshmi,

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada does

>> mean

>>>>>>> intoxication

>>>>>>>> or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to

> kaamana

>>>> which

>>>>>>> means

>>>>>>>> desires for things possessed by others. That is what

>> Asteya,

>>>>> one

>>>>>>> of the

>>>>>>>> Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> We are talking about auspiciousness or other wise of

> the

>>>>> dormant

>>>>>>> or

>>>>>>>> awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can be

>>>>> misinterpreted

>>>>>>> if

>>>>>>>> one wants to do that. But that does not serve any

>> purpose. I

>>>>> would

>>>>>>> not

>>>>>>>> go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and Avidya

>> related to

>>>>> Maa.

>>>>>>> I have

>>>>>>>> not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a shloka, to

>>>> support

>>>>> your

>>>>>>>> proposition that dormant Kundalini is inauspicious and

>> the

>>>>>>> awakened

>>>>>>>> Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already posted

>> the

>>>> way

>>>>> my

>>>>>>>> generation has been taught to accept an argument, so I

>> shall

>>>>> not

>>>>>>> repeat

>>>>>>>> it here.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> But I will not resort to conjectures and would like to

>> quote

>>>>> from

>>>>>>>> Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant

>> Kundalini.

>>>>> Being

>>>>>>>> graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have to

>> translate

>>>>> it

>>>>>>> for you.

>>>>>>>> Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

>>>>>>>> ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

>>>>>>>> devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

>>>>>>>> devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

>>>>>>>> mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

>>>>>>>> mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

>>>>>>>> sa me mat&mnuiSwta kÂ…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

>>>>>>>> sä me mätåmanusthitä kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I am sure you must have some quote to support your

>>>> contention.

>>>>> I

>>>>>>> would

>>>>>>>> like to see the shloka, as against conjectures, so

> that

>> I

>>>> can

>>>>>>> improve

>>>>>>>> upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I can understand your reluctance to support your

>>>> propositions

>>>>> with

>>>>>>>> suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you by

>> pointing

>>>>> out

>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>> inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and Rahu

>>>>> combinations

>>>>>>> in two

>>>>>>>> different chart as stand out combinations only.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and if I

>> have

>>>> done

>>>>> so

>>>>>>>> inadvertently I crave your pardon.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Take care,

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Chandrashekhar

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Om Gurave Namah

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha (anger),

> lobha

>>>>> (greed),

>>>>>>> moha

>>>>>>>>> (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and maatsarya

>>>> (jealousy)

>>>>>>>>> If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply among

>> the

>>>>>>>>> shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is

>> intoxicated/drunk

>>>> with

>>>>>>>>> power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya swaroopini" and

>>>> correct

>>>>>>>>> appreciation of Mother includes understanding of

> both

>>>>> facets. As

>>>>>>>>> Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be

> routed

>>>>> towards

>>>>>>> good

>>>>>>>>> deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the same?

>> The

>>>>> wisdom,

>>>>>>>>> required to put this immense shakti to good use, is

>>>>> represented

>>>>>>> by

>>>>>>>>> Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati, wisdom

>> and

>>>>> power, is

>>>>>>>>> said to be auspicious because it ensures the

>>>>> correct/judicious

>>>>>>> end

>>>>>>>>> use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti is

> very

>> very

>>>>>>>>> important.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and krura.

> I

>>>> also

>>>>>>> always

>>>>>>>>> said all planets, including Jupiter, can give

> malefic

>>>>> results, if

>>>>>>>>> they are functionally empowered to do so. You can

>> refer to

>>>>> all my

>>>>>>>>> previous mails to confirm this.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Sir, Truth is much more important than winning or

>> losing an

>>>>>>>>> argument. All discussions must proceed as an

>> exploration

>>>> and

>>>>>>>>> celebration of Truth. When this is not the case, I

> see

>> no

>>>>>>> purpose in

>>>>>>>>> continuing these discussions.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,

>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> <%40>,

> Chandrashekhar

>>>>>>>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Dear Divine Lakshmi,

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age are

>>>> operating

>>>>> at

>>>>>>>>> different

>>>>>>>>>> levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not die

>> young.

>>>> So

>>>>>>> please

>>>>>>>>> do not

>>>>>>>>>> try to mix the issues. If you have read Swamiji's

>>>>> biography you

>>>>>>>>> will

>>>>>>>>>> find that he fell sick many times despite of

>> apparent

>>>>> robust

>>>>>>>>> physique.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart

> confirms

>>>> with

>>>>> his

>>>>>>>>> being

>>>>>>>>>> capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did not

> know

>> I

>>>> was

>>>>>>> expected

>>>>>>>>> to

>>>>>>>>>> analyze the entire chart. By the way if there is a

>> Kuja

>>>>> dosha

>>>>>>> how

>>>>>>>>> does

>>>>>>>>>> that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do not

>> bring

>>>> our

>>>>>>>>> devotion to

>>>>>>>>>> Lord Rama (and we both have that) into

> astrological

>>>>> analysis of

>>>>>>>>> his chart.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Bringing in the dashas when the discussions are on

>> the

>>>>> effects

>>>>>>> of

>>>>>>>>> grahas

>>>>>>>>>> will only lead the discussion to no where. The two

>> have

>>>> to

>>>>> be

>>>>>>> seen

>>>>>>>>>> separately as we are not trying to time an event

> but

>>>> only

>>>>>>> trying

>>>>>>>>> to find

>>>>>>>>>> what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you have

>> perhaps

>>>>>>> forgotten

>>>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>>> saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha in

> that

>>>>> perspective

>>>>>>>>> and let

>>>>>>>>>> me know your views. And if by the way you read my

>> mail,

>>>> I

>>>>> did

>>>>>>> not

>>>>>>>>> say

>>>>>>>>>> anything about mars being killer for him, only

> that

>> it

>>>>> gave him

>>>>>>>>> Sarcoma

>>>>>>>>>> being 3rd lord.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Also could you explain why Sun being Atma and

> always

>>>>>>> beneficent as

>>>>>>>>> you

>>>>>>>>>> have claimed all along in the thread on the topic,

>> did

>>>> its

>>>>>>>>> Mahadasha

>>>>>>>>>> prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> Take care,

>>>>>>>>>> Chandrashekhar.

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Om Gurave Namah

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, remember that in Swami

>> Vivekananda's

>>>>> chart

>>>>>>> Surya

>>>>>>>>> is

>>>>>>>>>>> lord of

>>>>>>>>>>>> the 9th occupying the lagna and causing a

>> powerful

>>>> Raj

>>>>>>> yoga. At

>>>>>>>>>>> the same

>>>>>>>>>>>> time if you thin how long the Swamiji lived,

> you

>> may

>>>>> have

>>>>>>> to

>>>>>>>>> think

>>>>>>>>>>> again

>>>>>>>>>>>> about saying that it did not act as Mahakrura.

>> Think

>>>>> about

>>>>>>>>> what it

>>>>>>>>>>> did

>>>>>>>>>>>> to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also, before

>> declaring

>>>>> that it

>>>>>>>>> became

>>>>>>>>>>>> shubha or less malefic.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an icchamrityu and

>>>> looking

>>>>> at

>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>> dass

>>>>>>>>>>> operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that he

>> passed

>>>>> away in

>>>>>>> Jup-

>>>>>>>>> Ven-

>>>>>>>>>>> Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-10

>> (3:59:13

>>>> pm)

>>>>>>>>>>> Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-27

>> (4:48:54

>>>>> pm)

>>>>>>>>>>> Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-12

>> (10:43:55

>>>>> pm)

>>>>>>>>>>> Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-07

>> (5:06:28

>>>> am)

>>>>>>>>>>> Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-06

>> (2:29:24

>>>>> am)

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05

> (1:27:03

>> am)

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus is the

>> 2nd

>>>> lord

>>>>> from

>>>>>>>>> Moon

>>>>>>>>>>> and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is in the

>> house

>>>>> of

>>>>>>> Venus

>>>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>> gives the results of Venus and Saturn is the 2nd

>> lord

>>>>> from

>>>>>>>>>>> lagna....all are marakas. the maraka

>> significations

>>>> are

>>>>>>> stronger

>>>>>>>>>>> from Moon, and it's the cause of his early death.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> I fail to see where Sun comes into all this.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting 7th

>> house,

>>>>> can

>>>>>>> give

>>>>>>>>>>> parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore the

>> influence

>>>>> of

>>>>>>> Saturn

>>>>>>>>> on

>>>>>>>>>>> Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th house?

> I

>> am

>>>>> sure

>>>>>>> even

>>>>>>>>> weak

>>>>>>>>>>> Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--))but

>>>> without

>>>>> the

>>>>>>> raja

>>>>>>>>>>> yoga and the strong soul-level impact he created

>>>>> wherever he

>>>>>>>>> went.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Or if you like look at what happened to the 7th

>>>>>>>>>>>> Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in the

> 7th

>>>> bhava.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think the

>> strong

>>>>> Mars in

>>>>>>> 7th

>>>>>>>>>>> gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You have not

>>>>> commented

>>>>>>> on the

>>>>>>>>>>> exalted Saturn in 4th house.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> In each of the

>>>>>>>>>>>> example provided by you look at the bhava that

>> the

>>>>> planets

>>>>>>>>> occupy

>>>>>>>>>>>> (barring Saturn, for reasons already stated in

>>>>> previous

>>>>>>> mail),

>>>>>>>>>>> without

>>>>>>>>>>>> looking at the charts as belonging to great

>> people,

>>>>> and

>>>>>>> then

>>>>>>>>> make

>>>>>>>>>>> up

>>>>>>>>>>>> your mind as to the truth or otherwise of what

> I

>>>> said.

>>>>> Did

>>>>>>> you

>>>>>>>>>>> know

>>>>>>>>>>>> Ramana Maharshi died following a malignant

>> sarcoma

>>>> of

>>>>> left

>>>>>>> hand

>>>>>>>>>>> and Mars

>>>>>>>>>>>> is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in his

> chart,

>> in

>>>>>>>>> exaltation. Do

>>>>>>>>>>> you

>>>>>>>>>>>> think Mars gave him benevolent results?

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to examine the

>>>>> following

>>>>>>> dasa

>>>>>>>>>>> sequences with an open mind. Sun is the 3rd lord

>> from

>>>>> Moon

>>>>>>> (AK) &

>>>>>>>>>>> 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's chart, rahu

>> is

>>>> with

>>>>> Sun

>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>> gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's effects...all of

>> which

>>>>> point to

>>>>>>>>>>> dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house and

>> ketu

>>>> can

>>>>> give

>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>>>> effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's effect, if

> at

>> all,

>>>>> was

>>>>>>> only

>>>>>>>>>>> indirect, and he was not the killer.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-03

>> (2:05:32

>>>> pm)

>>>>>>>>>>> Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-21

>> (8:49:14

>>>> am)

>>>>>>>>>>> Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-18

>> (12:04:47

>>>>> am)

>>>>>>>>>>> Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-20

>> (12:18:02

>>>>> am)

>>>>>>>>>>> Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

>>>> (11:08:26

>>>>> pm)

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

>> (12:47:04

>>>> pm)

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> I think what stands out is the fact that the

> dasa

>> of

>>>> the

>>>>>>> graha

>>>>>>>>>>> conjoined Moon brought about death. I think

> their

>> mind

>>>>>>> willed the

>>>>>>>>>>> death.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

>>>>>>>>> unrelated/unassociated

>>>>>>>>>>> with itself? I request you to consider the above

>>>>> objectively.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> I will talk about the other charts/issues in my

>> next

>>>>> mail.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,

>>>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not know where you find Mars strong as a

>> planet

>>>> in

>>>>>>>>>>> debilitation in

>>>>>>>>>>>> Navamsha gives results of debility even when

> in

>>>>> exaltation

>>>>>>> in

>>>>>>>>> rasi

>>>>>>>>>>>> chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane

> smritam

>> has

>>>>>>> already

>>>>>>>>> been

>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered

>> Mars/Venus

>>>> in

>>>>>>> Thakur's

>>>>>>>>>>> chart because they are debilitated. Please go

>> through

>>>> my

>>>>>>> message

>>>>>>>>>>> again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

>>>>>>>>>>>> aware of his revolutionary background and that

>> he

>>>> was

>>>>>>> editor

>>>>>>>>> of a

>>>>>>>>>>> paper

>>>>>>>>>>>> "Vande Mataram" not much known for its soft

>> language.

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Same is the case with strong Malefics giving

>> P.M.

>>>>> Yogas.

>>>>>>> Every

>>>>>>>>>>> graha is

>>>>>>>>>>>> capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga

>> attributed

>>>> to

>>>>> it,

>>>>>>> at

>>>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>>>> very

>>>>>>>>>>>> least. It would only be naive to imagine they

>> would

>>>>> all

>>>>>>> give

>>>>>>>>>>> identical

>>>>>>>>>>>> results as indicated by Parashara or all with

>> Pancha

>>>>>>>>> Mahapurusha

>>>>>>>>>>> Yoga

>>>>>>>>>>>> would only rule over different parts of India

>>>> (barring

>>>>>>> Saturn),

>>>>>>>>>>> just

>>>>>>>>>>>> because the sage said so. The sages gave us

>>>> principles

>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>> expected us

>>>>>>>>>>>> to apply them to real life horoscope using

>> Viveka.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> I would gladly give you the shloka giving the

>>>>> reference to

>>>>>>>>>>>> "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old

> classic

>>>>> respected

>>>>>>>>> amongst

>>>>>>>>>>>> astrologers, but as you do not seem to accept

>>>> anything

>>>>> that

>>>>>>>>> does

>>>>>>>>>>> not fit

>>>>>>>>>>>> in with what, you think. is said by Dr. Raman,

>> it

>>>>> would be

>>>>>>> an

>>>>>>>>>>> exercise

>>>>>>>>>>>> in futility. should you yet want the shloka I

>> would

>>>> of

>>>>>>> course

>>>>>>>>> be

>>>>>>>>>>> glad to

>>>>>>>>>>>> give it to you.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Chandrashekhar.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Om Gurave namah

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem to be disagreeing with Shri B.V.

>> Raman

>>>> that

>>>>>>> strong

>>>>>>>>>>> planets,

>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether malefic or benefics give good

> results,

>>>> while

>>>>> weak

>>>>>>>>> planets

>>>>>>>>>>>>> give bad results. Perhaps you also disagree

>> about

>>>>> strong

>>>>>>>>> malefics

>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it contrary

> to

>>>> what

>>>>> all

>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>>>> jyotish

>>>>>>>>>>>>> texts teach?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, here are a few examples, where I find

>> that

>>>>> strong

>>>>>>>>> malefics

>>>>>>>>>>>>> have neither made the natives krura nor that

>> their

>>>>>>>>> significations

>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffered.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna and

>> mars in

>>>>> 5th

>>>>>>> house

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in lagna.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th house

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted Saturn

>> (9H)

>>>> and

>>>>> Rahu

>>>>>>>>> (4H).

>>>>>>>>>>> Mars

>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Venus are also exalted in rasi, while

>>>>> debilitated in

>>>>>>>>> navamsa.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sir, can you give me the reference

>> for "vipareetam

>>>>> shaneH

>>>>>>>>>>> sritam"?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does it, by any chance, refer to Saturn's

>>>> placement

>>>>> in

>>>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>> 8th

>>>>>>>>>>> house

>>>>>>>>>>>>> being beneficial?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am happy that you agree strong Saturn

> gives

>> good

>>>>>>> results.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you tell me from where the saying is

>> because i

>>>>> would

>>>>>>>>> like to

>>>>>>>>>>>>> read it up myself and understand.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46@

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <chandrashekhar46%40.co.uk>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Divine Lakshmi,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> About Krura planets the saying is,

> that

>> with

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strength the Krura grahas

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become more Krura (Maha-krura) and the

>>>> shubha

>>>>>>> grahas

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become more shubha.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only Shani is more krura when weak and

>>>>> beneficial

>>>>>>> or

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less krura when

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strong "Viparitama shaneH smritam".

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chandrashekhar.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Om Gurave Namah

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My sun dasa started when I was 9

> years

>>>> old,

>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ended when I was 15

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years old. How come you didn't

> notice

>> the

>>>>> second

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part? I was old

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough to understand the difference

>> between

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success and failure, I

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guess!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, if you agree that Rahu is

>> giving

>>>>> Sun's

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results, and those

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results are exceptionally good, then

> it

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> automatically follows that

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sun is strong in my chart because

>>>> according

>>>>> to

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shri B.V Raman, evil

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planets, especially when weak, give

>> bad

>>>>> results

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (vide "a catechism

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of astrology"), while strong

> planets,

>> even

>>>> if

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil, give good

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results. If my Sun were weak, he

>> wouldn't

>>>> be

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving such good

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results:--))

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since Mercury is hopelessly combust

>> and

>>>>> inferior

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in shadbala

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strength, the major results of Dharma

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> karmadhipathi yoga are also

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> given by Sun, because according

> to "300

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> combinations" of Sri

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raman, a planet with higher shadbala

>> is

>>>> more

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likely to give the

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results of a yoga.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding Karna, I request you to

> read

>> the

>>>>> Karna

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Parva of

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mahabharata again. When he died, the

>>>> nature

>>>>> bowed

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in grief, because

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he's one of the noblest persons in

>>>>> Mahabharata.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even the episode you

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quoted happened because Parashurama

>> would

>>>>> teach

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only Brahmins and

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karna desperately wanted to learn

>>>>> dhanurvidya

>>>>>>> from

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Parashurama so

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that he can support Duryodhana.

> Deceit

>> is

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly punishable and

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karna did pay dearly. But it's to be

>> borne

>>>>> in

>>>>>>> mind

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that whatever

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karna did was only to please

>> Duryodhana,

>>>> his

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dearest friend. Karna

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> did not gain anything personally.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10th house is the 3rd house from 8th

>> house

>>>> (I

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think there was a typo

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at your end). In the natural zodiac,

>> the

>>>> 10

>>>>> th

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sign, being the

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cardinal earth sign, represents

>>>>> south /dakshina

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disha. South is the

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> direction ruled by Yama, the lord of

>>>> death,

>>>>> hence

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10th house

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> represents burial grounds. So, the

>> Rudras

>>>>>>> (Saturn,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sun and Mars) are

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strong in south. Also, Sun resides

> in

>>>> south

>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> starts his

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> northern voyage from here. So he has

>>>> digbala

>>>>> in

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10th house.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did clarify that when I referred

> to

>>>> Surya

>>>>> as

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Karma saakshi, it's

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only to his status as antaraatma and

>> not

>>>> as a

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deity. Perhaps this

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> escaped your attention.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is my last post on the subject.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> <%40>

>>>>>>>>>>> <%40>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> <%40>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <%40>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <%

>> 40>,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chandrashekhar

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Divine Lakshmi,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You were too young for the results

>> of

>>>> the

>>>>> dasha

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to manifest,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though it

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is good news that your father had

>>>>> promotions

>>>>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you received

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prizes/accolades during that time.

>> It is

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interesting to know you

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> got

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these results at a young age of 9

> or

>> so

>>>> as

>>>>> that

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is when Sun dasha

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operative. I am relieved you did

> not

>>>> have

>>>>> any

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> health problems in

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> March-August 1970 period.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But we are talking about Rahu and

>> Rahu

>>>>> would

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give results of Sun

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prominently, by conjunction, as

> you

>>>>> guessed but

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also that of

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mercury

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (You have a Dharmakarmaadhipati

> yoga

>>>> after

>>>>> all)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that is why I

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for understanding Sun its dasha

>> instead

>>>> of

>>>>> Rahu

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dasha needs to be

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> analyzed.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mercury is malefic not because I

> say

>> so

>>>> but

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because Jyotish says

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mercury is malefic when conjunct a

>> papa

>>>>> graha

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and he is conjunct

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sun and Rahu.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10th house is the apex of Artha

>> trikona

>>>> and

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directly involved with

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> efforts to earn money. Though

>> claimed to

>>>> be

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> smashana/burial

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ground, it

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is 4th from ayush sthana (8th) and

>> its

>>>>> home

>>>>>>> that

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why affliction

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to it

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can give death. But 8th is more

>>>> popularly

>>>>>>> called

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mrityu sthana and

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hence

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 10th is called Smashana. If it is

>> really

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> smashana why would it be

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> called

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> karma sthana and why would Sun be

> at

>> its

>>>>> most

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> brilliant there?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not say he can not represent

>> water

>>>>> bodies

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in temple, but not

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chandrashekhar.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Om Gurave Namah

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My Sun dasa was excellent too.

> My

>>>> father

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> received promotion(s),

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school/college days were great

> and

>> i

>>>>> received

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wide acclaim/prizes

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for my ability in creative

>> writing,

>>>>> Veena,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quiz contests etc,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apart

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from studies. So, for a student,

> I

>>>> guess

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's excellent!!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do you justify this, if Sun

>> were

>>>>> weak?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rahu is certainly

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the yogakaraka results, but

> being

>> in

>>>>> Sun's

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> house and being

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conjunct

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sun, don't you think Rahu is

> also

>>>> giving

>>>>> the

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results of Sun? You

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said that mercury is malefic and

>>>> heavily

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> combust too:--))

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1th house also represent burial

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ground/smashaana. Is that a place

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for attachment?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chandra represents all water

>> bodies,

>>>> so

>>>>> why

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't he represent

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temple tank?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakshmi

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> === message truncated ===

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tired of spam? Mail has the best

>> spam

>>>>>>> protection

>>>>>>>>>>> around

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>> <>

>>>>>>>>> < <>>

>>>>>>>>>>> < <>

>>>>>>>>> < <>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> <

> <>

>>>>>>>>> < <>>

>>>>>>>>>>> < <>

>>>>>>>>> < <>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

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

> --

>> ----

>>>> --

>>>>> ----

>>>>>>> ----

>>>>>>>>> -

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

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

>>>> 268.11.7/435 -

>>>>>

>>>>>>> Release

>>>>>>>>>>> Date:

>>>>>>>>>>>>> 8/31/2006

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have

> been

>>>>> removed]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

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

> --

>> ----

>>>> --

>>>>> ----

>>>>>>> -

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

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

>> 268.12.2/441 -

>>>>> Release

>>>>>>>>> Date:

>>>>>>>>>>> 9/7/2006

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been

>> removed]

>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

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

> --

>> ----

>>>> --

>>>>> -

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

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

>

>>>>> Release

>>>>>>> Date:

>>>>>>>>> 9/8/2006

>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>> ________

>>>>>>>>>> Try the all-new Mail. "The New Version is

>>>> radically

>>>>>>> easier

>>>>>>>>> to use" – The Wall Street Journal

>>>>>>>>>> http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

>>>>>>>>> <http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html>

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

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

> --

>> ----

>>>> --

>>>>> ----

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

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

>> Release

>>>>> Date:

>>>>>>> 9/8/2006

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>> _________

>>>>>>>> Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling

>>>>> worldwide

>>>>>>> with voicemail http://uk.messenger.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi ji

 

Thanks for the mail and words.

I will listen to the audio when time permits and write.Thanks for

the quote on mind and reminding me of akasha tattwa and nada ulpatti.

Yes thanks to lord,Music is very dear.

 

Now not only the geniuses mentioned(Einstein etc) common men like me

can also feel HIM.During deeparadhana in a temple,when we are

praying with eyes closed and concentration between eyebrows,we can

feel HIM during those Bhakthi sandra Nirvrithi nimishas.Thus HE is

Kind.

 

Regds

Pradeep

 

 

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

<b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

>

> Om Gurave Namah

>

> Namaste Pradeep,

>

> > Thanks for the reference on Aiteraya Upanishad.

>

> Lakshmi: My pleasure:-))

>

> >

> > Rashis and tattwas as you know is the field.Same is body.Only the

> > planets can enliven them.Rasa is important and is the

> essence.Sarpa is

> > connected to water and trees.Trees have watery essence namely the

> > Sap.Thus Rahu is having a role for link.Moreover we have seen

> Tantrik

> > references regarding importance of rahu for sivashakthi aikya.

> >

> > Rahu is TIME serpent and hence is part of TIME/SPACE itself.Pull

> > mentioned was the effect,and the seed or source is Soul/Mind

> > itself.Necessary energy is obtained through the movement or

> > progression of Sun/Moon.When Sun/Moon merges into ONE everything

> else

> > disappears.As it is a Chaaya Graha it cannot cast any drishti

like

> the

> > other

> > seven.Throught flux it can influence conjoining grahas as well as

> > extract/absorb Rashi qualities.Also as you know reversal of

> essence is

> > the beginning.Kindly link it with kundalini as sarpa and

reversal.

>

> Lakshmi: I basically think that Rahu and Ketu are energies,

pointing

> in opposing directions. Rahu points downwards and Ketu points

> upwards. I have always related Rahu-Ketu to kundalini and written

> about them extensively in my articles....about how Rahu-Ketu come

> together in some of the higher vargas.

>

> For material purposes Rahu is exalted in Taurus, along with Moon,

> :--), so he does influence attachments, as you very rightly say,

> while Ketu has the opposite effect. "The mind is its own place,

and

> in itself, can make heaven of Hell, and a hell of Heaven."

>

> I think Sanjy ji's lecture can be found on atri-SJC site.

>

> You really love music, don't you?:--)) Venus rules all Beauty,

which

> in the higher sense is Truth itself. Btw, Naada is an attribute of

> akasha, of Jupiter!

>

> I agree with you that any epiphanic moment in which one can

> transcend oneself and glimpse the Infinite, is a moment with

> God...like the one when Newton spotted the fateful apple falling,

or

> when Einstein stumbled upon the relativity theory or the one when

> Arjuna was granted vishwaroopa sandarshanam!!

>

> Regards,

> Lakshmi

>

>

>

>

> > Also in another mail you have mentioned about Jupiter and

> Ananda.True

> > wisdom is ananda and hence Guru is karaka.Shukra gives

> > Paramananda.Poets have said Anandam Anandanandam Jagadanandam

> > sangeetham!!!.The bliss, Union ,confluence ,continous flow,which

> music

> > can bestow is beyond words.Also continous integrated

consciousness

> is

> > Brahmam.Shukra is for finer wisdom and Guru for broad

wisdom.Nada

> can

> > permeate and open even the subtlest and finer openings within us.

> >

> > Not only music ,if you can absorb the rasa oozing from the

bhavas

> on

> > to which Padma subrahmaniam is merging,one can get closer.When

> Sachin

> > Tendulkar or Brian Lara sights a ball in advance,send a stimulus

to

> > brain,transfer the signals to hand/feet and body,and play a

stroke

> > with timing and perfect balance,and everything happening within

> split

> > of a second - It is Aananda for them !!!.In other words

> > perfection,continous perfection is HIM.If we can union with him

> even

> > for a second Ananda Rasa Oozes.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

> > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Om Gurave Namah

> > >

> > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > >

> > > I am glad that we are converging on real learning now. As the

> Sage

> > > Parashara summed up, all planets/beings are but manifestations

> of

> > > the supreme spirit. Have you heard the amazing lecture given

by

> > > Sanjay ji on Varaha avatara (Rahu) and how it

> governs/facilitates

> > > birth (surfacing) of the body(prithvi)from the water (amniotic

> > > fluid?).

> > >

> > > Just one point. The body/mind/faculties already exist before

the

> > > soul enters it, animating all. I request you to read Aitareya

> > > upanishad for greater understanding of this concept.

> > >

> > > That's a lovely point about Rahu representing the intersecting

> point

> > > of Atma and ManaH. However, is pull/attachment represented by

> Rahu,

> > > who doesn't have a body and lacks the necessary mass to cause

> the

> > > pull? It's Prithvi tattwa which causes attraction(Taurus-earth

> sign-

> > > natural 2nd house, which governs attraction) and its the jala

> tattwa

> > > which causes attachment (Cancer). So, all these

> pulls/attractions

> > > and attachments are caused by interplay of body and mind....

and

> not

> > > by soul.

> > >

> > > Chandrasekhar ji might feel that since jala tattwa represents

> > > moksha, it can not indicate attachments. I request you to go

> through

> > > Lalithopaakhyanam to understand how "rasa" is vital to

> > > attraction/attachment/creation and happiness.

> > >

> > > But I do agree that Rahu tends to magnify everything and take

> over

> > > others' significations to such an extent that we forget who is

> the

> > > real karaka and attribute all these to Rahu.

> > >

> > > Aham-ahanta is a huge and difficult topic and certainly not to

> be

> > > attempted when one's (me, ofcourse)feeling extremely sleepy. I

> will

> > > try to type out my understanding tomorrow if my sons permit me

> to

> > > touch the computer, otherwise, we'll meet on Monday.

> > >

> > > So, good night and happy weekend:--))

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Lakshmi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > >

> > > > I humbly feel, as in essence we are the same, we are

mutually

> > > learning

> > > > to cross the ocean of samsara,which is the very purpose of

> taking

> > > body.

> > > > I am scribbling something based on the gains obtained during

> > > guidance/

> > > > discussion from/with Chandrashekhar ji,you and other learned

> > > > members.Read the mail from Inderjit ji on EGO.Kindly check

if

> we

> > > are

> > > > on the right track.

> > > >

> > > > Aaditya Bhagawan or Sun is KalaSwaroopa.He creates Time.He

is

> > > karaka

> > > > for our lagna/self and gives us eyesight,paurusha and is the

> subtle

> > > > core in us.Let us Pray and Thank HIM for all the Light -

> sustaining

> > > > life. We are advocates, neither for Rahu nor for Sun.Let

their

> > > > strength,in our chart,not create any bias.

> > > >

> > > > It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -

nothing

> > > belongs

> > > > to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there is a

> > > > separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called

EGO

> or

> > > > Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For example

a

> King

> > > > might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc

> > > resulting in

> > > > Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

> > > >

> > > > Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

> > > >

> > > > Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for

Atman.Though

> > > Atman is

> > > > the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the

> purpose of

> > > > knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but

part

> of

> > > > Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to

> > > superimposition

> > > > of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per

> Sankara.The

> > > > jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first entry

as

> far

> > > as

> > > > humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma

as

> well

> > > > follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual feeling

of

> > > > me/mine is ''í''.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have Death

> and

> > > > Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact

between

> > > > atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us

> clutch

> > > on

> > > > to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus

> intoxication

> > > is

> > > > nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is

> enhancing

> > > the

> > > > already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just

keeping

> > > > together the already manifested superimposition

(Atma/Mind).The

> > > level

> > > > of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the

> > > strength of

> > > > moon and further associations.

> > > >

> > > > Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus does

> not

> > > make

> > > > it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not

> because

> > > of

> > > > Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before

realization

> nor

> > > > after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma identifies

> itself

> > > > with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in

> other

> > > words

> > > > the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

> > > >

> > > > Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should

think

> of

> > > feet

> > > > through Meena/Rahu.

> > > >

> > > > Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is

> EGO ,what is

> > > > pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me

> what is

> > > > Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated

illusion

> in

> > > our

> > > > context?.

> > > >

> > > > In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya

> (which is

> > > > the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but

part

> of

> > > > him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a

> catalyst or

> > > > clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

> > > >

> > > > If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still

(if

> it

> > > is

> > > > possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind of

> > > > Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

> > > >

> > > > Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space is

> created

> > > > and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into picture).Brahman

and

> > > > Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards

> > > understanding

> > > > the sublime and far TRUTH.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > >

> > > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > > >

> > > > > Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

> > > > > Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting

> > > that "ego" is

> > > > > found only in some people. If we interpret

dispassionately,

> > > perhaps

> > > > > Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego (

> > > necessary

> > > > > for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being,

as

> much

> > > as

> > > > > soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't find

> us

> > > > > fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego,

you

> have

> > > > > ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it, perhaps

> in

> > > > > different degrees.

> > > > >

> > > > > How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to

some

> > > > > people!! How wrong was i to think that we are

> exceptions! "Ego"

> > > is

> > > > > part of the natural state of every individual...like the

> > > kundalini

> > > > > residing in mooladhara of every one.

> > > > >

> > > > > Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in

> dissolving

> > > this

> > > > > separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a

state

> of

> > > > > Realization.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet exhilerating

> > > > > understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

> > > > > > > the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the

> above

> > > and

> > > > > > result

> > > > > > > in dukham.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma

> reference

> > > was

> > > > > not

> > > > > > chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and

> certified

> > > to

> > > > > be

> > > > > > impeccable.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that Saturn

> gives

> > > > > > contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not recall

> > > > > > Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it,

> please

> > > let

> > > > > me

> > > > > > know.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not

say

> > > > > anything

> > > > > > about Rahu representing "mada". But have they explicitly

> said

> > > any

> > > > > > thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not drawing

> > > > > convoluted

> > > > > > conclusions then?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it when

> it

> > > > > doesn't?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing

either

> Sun

> > > or

> > > > > > Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said that

> Rahu

> > > is

> > > > > > also capable of giving great spirituality when involved

in

> > > such

> > > > > > yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these

days

> is

> > > for

> > > > > > fair treatment of all planets.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the

> context.Why

> > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > just one among the shad ripus?Why not

> > > lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

> > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > not any of these.He makes us have all these.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator

> of "I"- a

> > > > > false

> > > > > > feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of ego

> (as

> > > > > > defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This

feeling

> is

> > > also

> > > > > > the basis of the shadripus which are based on one

> individual

> > > being

> > > > > > different from other.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sun called as Atma karaka

> > > > > > > is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he

> enters

> > > the

> > > > > > body

> > > > > > > he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

> > > > > taking ,until

> > > > > > self

> > > > > > > realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham mentioning

> about

> > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > soul and its plight.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling

> > > of ''I''.It

> > > > > is

> > > > > > just

> > > > > > > our assumption.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you

> tell me

> > > > > > why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual lordship

by

> > > Saturn

> > > > > > and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma

> (Saturn)

> > > and

> > > > > > unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth

> takes

> > > place

> > > > > > because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel

> trapped

> > > in a

> > > > > > body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time?

> Does he

> > > > > cause

> > > > > > day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's because

> he

> > > causes

> > > > > > the interminable birth cycle.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-

> > > mails, "ego"

> > > > > is

> > > > > > a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself

have

> said

> > > > > > that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding us

> giving

> > > us

> > > > > a

> > > > > > smoky/obscurant idea".

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this

> together,

> > > > > please

> > > > > > tell me if Rahu does not give a

> illusiory/intoxicated/false

> > > idea

> > > > > of

> > > > > > oneself.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i

> understand

> > > the

> > > > > > way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have

> nothing

> > > > > > against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is

> bringing

> > > me

> > > > > > immense spiritual benefits, like the present discussion:-

-

> ))

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > Thanks

> > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that the

> > > shloka

> > > > > from

> > > > > > > > Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

> > > > > > > > individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

> > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication"

belong

> in

> > > that

> > > > > > > > context, in that group?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I do not think either of you responded to that.

> perhaps

> > > you

> > > > > > missed

> > > > > > > > it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Can i have your response(s) please?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > , Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada

> does

> > > mean

> > > > > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > > > > or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to

> kaamana

> > > > > which

> > > > > > > > means

> > > > > > > > > desires for things possessed by others. That is

what

> > > Asteya,

> > > > > > one

> > > > > > > > of the

> > > > > > > > > Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > We are talking about auspiciousness or other wise

of

> the

> > > > > > dormant

> > > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can

be

> > > > > > misinterpreted

> > > > > > > > if

> > > > > > > > > one wants to do that. But that does not serve any

> > > purpose. I

> > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and Avidya

> > > related to

> > > > > > Maa.

> > > > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > > > not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a shloka,

> to

> > > > > support

> > > > > > your

> > > > > > > > > proposition that dormant Kundalini is inauspicious

> and

> > > the

> > > > > > > > awakened

> > > > > > > > > Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already

> posted

> > > the

> > > > > way

> > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > generation has been taught to accept an argument,

so

> I

> > > shall

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > repeat

> > > > > > > > > it here.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > But I will not resort to conjectures and would

like

> to

> > > quote

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant

> > > Kundalini.

> > > > > > Being

> > > > > > > > > graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have to

> > > translate

> > > > > > it

> > > > > > > > for you.

> > > > > > > > > Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

> > > > > > > > > ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

> > > > > > > > > devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

> > > > > > > > > devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

> > > > > > > > > mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

> > > > > > > > > mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

> > > > > > > > > sa me mat&mnuiSwta k…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

> > > > > > > > > sä me mätåmanusthitä

> kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I am sure you must have some quote to support your

> > > > > contention.

> > > > > > I

> > > > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > like to see the shloka, as against conjectures, so

> that

> > > I

> > > > > can

> > > > > > > > improve

> > > > > > > > > upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I can understand your reluctance to support your

> > > > > propositions

> > > > > > with

> > > > > > > > > suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you

by

> > > pointing

> > > > > > out

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and

Rahu

> > > > > > combinations

> > > > > > > > in two

> > > > > > > > > different chart as stand out combinations only.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and if

I

> > > have

> > > > > done

> > > > > > so

> > > > > > > > > inadvertently I crave your pardon.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha (anger),

> lobha

> > > > > > (greed),

> > > > > > > > moha

> > > > > > > > > > (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and

maatsarya

> > > > > (jealousy)

> > > > > > > > > > If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply

> among

> > > the

> > > > > > > > > > shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is

> > > intoxicated/drunk

> > > > > with

> > > > > > > > > > power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya swaroopini"

> and

> > > > > correct

> > > > > > > > > > appreciation of Mother includes understanding of

> both

> > > > > > facets. As

> > > > > > > > > > Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be

> routed

> > > > > > towards

> > > > > > > > good

> > > > > > > > > > deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the

> same?

> > > The

> > > > > > wisdom,

> > > > > > > > > > required to put this immense shakti to good use,

> is

> > > > > > represented

> > > > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > > > Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati,

> wisdom

> > > and

> > > > > > power, is

> > > > > > > > > > said to be auspicious because it ensures the

> > > > > > correct/judicious

> > > > > > > > end

> > > > > > > > > > use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti

is

> very

> > > very

> > > > > > > > > > important.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and

> krura. I

> > > > > also

> > > > > > > > always

> > > > > > > > > > said all planets, including Jupiter, can give

> malefic

> > > > > > results, if

> > > > > > > > > > they are functionally empowered to do so. You

can

> > > refer to

> > > > > > all my

> > > > > > > > > > previous mails to confirm this.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Sir, Truth is much more important than winning

or

> > > losing an

> > > > > > > > > > argument. All discussions must proceed as an

> > > exploration

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > celebration of Truth. When this is not the case,

I

> see

> > > no

> > > > > > > > purpose in

> > > > > > > > > > continuing these discussions.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > <%40>,

> Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age

are

> > > > > operating

> > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > > > different

> > > > > > > > > > > levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not

die

> > > young.

> > > > > So

> > > > > > > > please

> > > > > > > > > > do not

> > > > > > > > > > > try to mix the issues. If you have read

> Swamiji's

> > > > > > biography you

> > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > find that he fell sick many times despite of

> > > apparent

> > > > > > robust

> > > > > > > > > > physique.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart

> confirms

> > > > > with

> > > > > > his

> > > > > > > > > > being

> > > > > > > > > > > capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did not

> know

> > > I

> > > > > was

> > > > > > > > expected

> > > > > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > analyze the entire chart. By the way if there

is

> a

> > > Kuja

> > > > > > dosha

> > > > > > > > how

> > > > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > > that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do

not

> > > bring

> > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > devotion to

> > > > > > > > > > > Lord Rama (and we both have that) into

> astrological

> > > > > > analysis of

> > > > > > > > > > his chart.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Bringing in the dashas when the discussions

are

> on

> > > the

> > > > > > effects

> > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > will only lead the discussion to no where. The

> two

> > > have

> > > > > to

> > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > seen

> > > > > > > > > > > separately as we are not trying to time an

event

> but

> > > > > only

> > > > > > > > trying

> > > > > > > > > > to find

> > > > > > > > > > > what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you

have

> > > perhaps

> > > > > > > > forgotten

> > > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha in

> that

> > > > > > perspective

> > > > > > > > > > and let

> > > > > > > > > > > me know your views. And if by the way you read

> my

> > > mail,

> > > > > I

> > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > > say

> > > > > > > > > > > anything about mars being killer for him, only

> that

> > > it

> > > > > > gave him

> > > > > > > > > > Sarcoma

> > > > > > > > > > > being 3rd lord.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Also could you explain why Sun being Atma and

> always

> > > > > > > > beneficent as

> > > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > have claimed all along in the thread on the

> topic,

> > > did

> > > > > its

> > > > > > > > > > Mahadasha

> > > > > > > > > > > prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > For example, remember that in Swami

> > > Vivekananda's

> > > > > > chart

> > > > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > > > lord of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th occupying the lagna and causing a

> > > powerful

> > > > > Raj

> > > > > > > > yoga. At

> > > > > > > > > > > > the same

> > > > > > > > > > > > > time if you thin how long the Swamiji

lived,

> you

> > > may

> > > > > > have

> > > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > think

> > > > > > > > > > > > again

> > > > > > > > > > > > > about saying that it did not act as

> Mahakrura.

> > > Think

> > > > > > about

> > > > > > > > > > what it

> > > > > > > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > > > > > to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also, before

> > > declaring

> > > > > > that it

> > > > > > > > > > became

> > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha or less malefic.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an icchamrityu

> and

> > > > > looking

> > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > dass

> > > > > > > > > > > > operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that

he

> > > passed

> > > > > > away in

> > > > > > > > Jup-

> > > > > > > > > > Ven-

> > > > > > > > > > > > Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-10

> > > (3:59:13

> > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-

27

> > > (4:48:54

> > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-12

> > > (10:43:55

> > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-07

> > > (5:06:28

> > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-

06

> > > (2:29:24

> > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05

> (1:27:03

> > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus is

> the

> > > 2nd

> > > > > lord

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > > > > > and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is in

> the

> > > house

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > Venus

> > > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > gives the results of Venus and Saturn is the

> 2nd

> > > lord

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > lagna....all are marakas. the maraka

> > > significations

> > > > > are

> > > > > > > > stronger

> > > > > > > > > > > > from Moon, and it's the cause of his early

> death.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I fail to see where Sun comes into all this.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting

7th

> > > house,

> > > > > > can

> > > > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > > > parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore the

> > > influence

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > Saturn

> > > > > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > > > > > Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th

> house? I

> > > am

> > > > > > sure

> > > > > > > > even

> > > > > > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--))

> but

> > > > > without

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > raja

> > > > > > > > > > > > yoga and the strong soul-level impact he

> created

> > > > > > wherever he

> > > > > > > > > > went.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Or if you like look at what happened to the

7th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in

the

> 7th

> > > > > bhava.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think

the

> > > strong

> > > > > > Mars in

> > > > > > > > 7th

> > > > > > > > > > > > gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You have

> not

> > > > > > commented

> > > > > > > > on the

> > > > > > > > > > > > exalted Saturn in 4th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > In each of the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > example provided by you look at the bhava

> that

> > > the

> > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > occupy

> > > > > > > > > > > > > (barring Saturn, for reasons already

stated

> in

> > > > > > previous

> > > > > > > > mail),

> > > > > > > > > > > > without

> > > > > > > > > > > > > looking at the charts as belonging to

great

> > > people,

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > > > > > up

> > > > > > > > > > > > > your mind as to the truth or otherwise of

> what I

> > > > > said.

> > > > > > Did

> > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > > know

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi died following a malignant

> > > sarcoma

> > > > > of

> > > > > > left

> > > > > > > > hand

> > > > > > > > > > > > and Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > > is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in his

> chart,

> > > in

> > > > > > > > > > exaltation. Do

> > > > > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > think Mars gave him benevolent results?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to examine

> the

> > > > > > following

> > > > > > > > dasa

> > > > > > > > > > > > sequences with an open mind. Sun is the 3rd

> lord

> > > from

> > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > (AK) &

> > > > > > > > > > > > 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's chart,

> rahu

> > > is

> > > > > with

> > > > > > Sun

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's effects...all

of

> > > which

> > > > > > point to

> > > > > > > > > > > > dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house

and

> > > ketu

> > > > > can

> > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's effect,

if

> at

> > > all,

> > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > indirect, and he was not the killer.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-03

> > > (2:05:32

> > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-21

> > > (8:49:14

> > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-18

> > > (12:04:47

> > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-20

> > > (12:18:02

> > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-

14

> > > > > (11:08:26

> > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> > > (12:47:04

> > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I think what stands out is the fact that the

> dasa

> > > of

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > conjoined Moon brought about death. I think

> their

> > > mind

> > > > > > > > willed the

> > > > > > > > > > > > death.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

> > > > > > > > > > unrelated/unassociated

> > > > > > > > > > > > with itself? I request you to consider the

> above

> > > > > > objectively.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I will talk about the other charts/issues in

> my

> > > next

> > > > > > mail.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > I do not know where you find Mars strong

as

> a

> > > planet

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > debilitation in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Navamsha gives results of debility even

when

> in

> > > > > > exaltation

> > > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > rasi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane

> smritam

> > > has

> > > > > > > > already

> > > > > > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered

> > > Mars/Venus

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > > Thakur's

> > > > > > > > > > > > chart because they are debilitated. Please

go

> > > through

> > > > > my

> > > > > > > > message

> > > > > > > > > > > > again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > aware of his revolutionary background and

> that

> > > he

> > > > > was

> > > > > > > > editor

> > > > > > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > > > > > paper

> > > > > > > > > > > > > "Vande Mataram" not much known for its

soft

> > > language.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Same is the case with strong Malefics

giving

> > > P.M.

> > > > > > Yogas.

> > > > > > > > Every

> > > > > > > > > > > > graha is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga

> > > attributed

> > > > > to

> > > > > > it,

> > > > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > very

> > > > > > > > > > > > > least. It would only be naive to imagine

> they

> > > would

> > > > > > all

> > > > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > > > identical

> > > > > > > > > > > > > results as indicated by Parashara or all

> with

> > > Pancha

> > > > > > > > > > Mahapurusha

> > > > > > > > > > > > Yoga

> > > > > > > > > > > > > would only rule over different parts of

> India

> > > > > (barring

> > > > > > > > Saturn),

> > > > > > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > > > > > because the sage said so. The sages gave

us

> > > > > principles

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > expected us

> > > > > > > > > > > > > to apply them to real life horoscope using

> > > Viveka.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > I would gladly give you the shloka giving

> the

> > > > > > reference to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old

> classic

> > > > > > respected

> > > > > > > > > > amongst

> > > > > > > > > > > > > astrologers, but as you do not seem to

> accept

> > > > > anything

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > > > not fit

> > > > > > > > > > > > > in with what, you think. is said by Dr.

> Raman,

> > > it

> > > > > > would be

> > > > > > > > an

> > > > > > > > > > > > exercise

> > > > > > > > > > > > > in futility. should you yet want the

shloka

> I

> > > would

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > > course

> > > > > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > glad to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > give it to you.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > You seem to be disagreeing with Shri

B.V.

> > > Raman

> > > > > that

> > > > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > > > planets,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > whether malefic or benefics give good

> results,

> > > > > while

> > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > give bad results. Perhaps you also

> disagree

> > > about

> > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it

> contrary to

> > > > > what

> > > > > > all

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > jyotish

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > texts teach?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, here are a few examples, where I

> find

> > > that

> > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > have neither made the natives krura nor

> that

> > > their

> > > > > > > > > > significations

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna

and

> > > mars in

> > > > > > 5th

> > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in

> lagna.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted

Saturn

> > > (9H)

> > > > > and

> > > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > (4H).

> > > > > > > > > > > > Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and Venus are also exalted in rasi,

while

> > > > > > debilitated in

> > > > > > > > > > navamsa.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, can you give me the reference

> > > for "vipareetam

> > > > > > shaneH

> > > > > > > > > > > > sritam"?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it, by any chance, refer to

Saturn's

> > > > > placement

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > 8th

> > > > > > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > being beneficial?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am happy that you agree strong Saturn

> gives

> > > good

> > > > > > > > results.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me from where the saying is

> > > because i

> > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > like to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > read it up myself and understand.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46@

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46%

> 40.co.uk>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Krura planets the saying is,

> that

> > > with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength the Krura grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more Krura (Maha-krura) and

> the

> > > > > shubha

> > > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more shubha.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Shani is more krura when weak

> and

> > > > > > beneficial

> > > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > less krura when

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong "Viparitama shaneH smritam".

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My sun dasa started when I was 9

> years

> > > > > old,

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ended when I was 15

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > years old. How come you didn't

> notice

> > > the

> > > > > > second

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > part? I was old

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough to understand the

> difference

> > > between

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > success and failure, I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guess!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you agree that Rahu

is

> > > giving

> > > > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results, and those

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are exceptionally good,

> then it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically follows that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun is strong in my chart

because

> > > > > according

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri B.V Raman, evil

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planets, especially when weak,

> give

> > > bad

> > > > > > results

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (vide "a catechism

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of astrology"), while strong

> planets,

> > > even

> > > > > if

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evil, give good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. If my Sun were weak, he

> > > wouldn't

> > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving such good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Mercury is hopelessly

> combust

> > > and

> > > > > > inferior

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in shadbala

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength, the major results of

> Dharma

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karmadhipathi yoga are also

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > given by Sun, because according

> to "300

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combinations" of Sri

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman, a planet with higher

> shadbala

> > > is

> > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > likely to give the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of a yoga.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Karna, I request you

to

> read

> > > the

> > > > > > Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parva of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mahabharata again. When he died,

> the

> > > > > nature

> > > > > > bowed

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in grief, because

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > he's one of the noblest persons

in

> > > > > > Mahabharata.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even the episode you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted happened because

> Parashurama

> > > would

> > > > > > teach

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only Brahmins and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna desperately wanted to

learn

> > > > > > dhanurvidya

> > > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashurama so

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he can support Duryodhana.

> Deceit

> > > is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly punishable and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did pay dearly. But it's

to

> be

> > > borne

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that whatever

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did was only to please

> > > Duryodhana,

> > > > > his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dearest friend. Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did not gain anything personally.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the 3rd house from

> 8th

> > > house

> > > > > (I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think there was a typo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at your end). In the natural

> zodiac,

> > > the

> > > > > 10

> > > > > > th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sign, being the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cardinal earth sign, represents

> > > > > > south /dakshina

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disha. South is the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction ruled by Yama, the

lord

> of

> > > > > death,

> > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > represents burial grounds. So,

the

> > > Rudras

> > > > > > > > (Saturn,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Mars) are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong in south. Also, Sun

resides

> in

> > > > > south

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > starts his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > northern voyage from here. So he

> has

> > > > > digbala

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did clarify that when I

referred

> to

> > > > > Surya

> > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karma saakshi, it's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only to his status as antaraatma

> and

> > > not

> > > > > as a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deity. Perhaps this

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escaped your attention.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my last post on the

> subject.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

>

> > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

> > > 40>,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were too young for the

> results

> > > of

> > > > > the

> > > > > > dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to manifest,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is good news that your father

> had

> > > > > > promotions

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prizes/accolades during that

> time.

> > > It is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting to know you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > got

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these results at a young age

of

> 9 or

> > > so

> > > > > as

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is when Sun dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > operative. I am relieved you

did

> not

> > > > > have

> > > > > > any

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > health problems in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > March-August 1970 period.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But we are talking about Rahu

> and

> > > Rahu

> > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give results of Sun

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prominently, by conjunction,

as

> you

> > > > > > guessed but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also that of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You have a

Dharmakarmaadhipati

> yoga

> > > > > after

> > > > > > all)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that is why I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for understanding Sun its

dasha

> > > instead

> > > > > of

> > > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha needs to be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analyzed.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury is malefic not because

I

> say

> > > so

> > > > > but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because Jyotish says

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mercury is malefic when

conjunct

> a

> > > papa

> > > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and he is conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the apex of

Artha

> > > trikona

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly involved with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts to earn money. Though

> > > claimed to

> > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana/burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground, it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 4th from ayush sthana (8th)

> and

> > > its

> > > > > > home

> > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is why affliction

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can give death. But 8th is

more

> > > > > popularly

> > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mrityu sthana and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th is called Smashana. If it

> is

> > > really

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana why would it be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karma sthana and why would Sun

> be at

> > > its

> > > > > > most

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brilliant there?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not say he can not

> represent

> > > water

> > > > > > bodies

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in temple, but not

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My Sun dasa was excellent

too.

> My

> > > > > father

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > received promotion(s),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > school/college days were

great

> and

> > > i

> > > > > > received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wide acclaim/prizes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for my ability in creative

> > > writing,

> > > > > > Veena,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz contests etc,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from studies. So, for a

> student, I

> > > > > guess

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's excellent!!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you justify this, if

> Sun

> > > were

> > > > > > weak?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahu is certainly

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the yogakaraka results, but

> being

> > > in

> > > > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house and being

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun, don't you think Rahu is

> also

> > > > > giving

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of Sun? You

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said that mercury is malefic

> and

> > > > > heavily

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combust too:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1th house also represent

burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground/smashaana. Is that a place

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for attachment?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra represents all water

> > > bodies,

> > > > > so

> > > > > > why

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't he represent

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temple tank?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated ===

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the

> best

> > > spam

> > > > > > > > protection

> > > > > > > > > > > > around

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > <>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > <

<>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <

> <>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > <

<>

> > > > > > > > > > < <>>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > ----

> > > > > --

> > > > > > ----

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

> > > > > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-

date.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > > > > 268.11.7/435 -

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8/31/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message

have

> been

> > > > > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > ----

> > > > > --

> > > > > > ----

> > > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > > 268.12.2/441 -

> > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > > 9/7/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have

been

> > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > ----

> > > > > --

> > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> 268.12.2/442 -

> > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > ________

> > > > > > > > > > > Try the all-new Mail. "The New Version

is

> > > > > radically

> > > > > > > > easier

> > > > > > > > > > to use" – The Wall Street Journal

> > > > > > > > > > > http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

> > > > > > > > > > <http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html>

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> ----

> > > ----

> > > > > --

> > > > > > ----

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

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 -

 

> > > Release

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > _________

> > > > > > > > > Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC

> calling

> > > > > > worldwide

> > > > > > > > with voicemail http://uk.messenger.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Om Gurave Namah

 

Namaste Pradeep,

 

Yes, He is indeed kind.

 

Regards,

Lakshmi

 

 

 

, "vijayadas_pradeep"

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Lakshmi ji

>

> Thanks for the mail and words.

> I will listen to the audio when time permits and write.Thanks for

> the quote on mind and reminding me of akasha tattwa and nada

ulpatti.

> Yes thanks to lord,Music is very dear.

>

> Now not only the geniuses mentioned(Einstein etc) common men like

me

> can also feel HIM.During deeparadhana in a temple,when we are

> praying with eyes closed and concentration between eyebrows,we can

> feel HIM during those Bhakthi sandra Nirvrithi nimishas.Thus HE is

> Kind.

>

> Regds

> Pradeep

>

>

> , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> >

> > Om Gurave Namah

> >

> > Namaste Pradeep,

> >

> > > Thanks for the reference on Aiteraya Upanishad.

> >

> > Lakshmi: My pleasure:-))

> >

> > >

> > > Rashis and tattwas as you know is the field.Same is body.Only

the

> > > planets can enliven them.Rasa is important and is the

> > essence.Sarpa is

> > > connected to water and trees.Trees have watery essence namely

the

> > > Sap.Thus Rahu is having a role for link.Moreover we have seen

> > Tantrik

> > > references regarding importance of rahu for sivashakthi aikya.

> > >

> > > Rahu is TIME serpent and hence is part of TIME/SPACE

itself.Pull

> > > mentioned was the effect,and the seed or source is Soul/Mind

> > > itself.Necessary energy is obtained through the movement or

> > > progression of Sun/Moon.When Sun/Moon merges into ONE

everything

> > else

> > > disappears.As it is a Chaaya Graha it cannot cast any drishti

> like

> > the

> > > other

> > > seven.Throught flux it can influence conjoining grahas as well

as

> > > extract/absorb Rashi qualities.Also as you know reversal of

> > essence is

> > > the beginning.Kindly link it with kundalini as sarpa and

> reversal.

> >

> > Lakshmi: I basically think that Rahu and Ketu are energies,

> pointing

> > in opposing directions. Rahu points downwards and Ketu points

> > upwards. I have always related Rahu-Ketu to kundalini and

written

> > about them extensively in my articles....about how Rahu-Ketu

come

> > together in some of the higher vargas.

> >

> > For material purposes Rahu is exalted in Taurus, along with Moon,

> > :--), so he does influence attachments, as you very rightly say,

> > while Ketu has the opposite effect. "The mind is its own place,

> and

> > in itself, can make heaven of Hell, and a hell of Heaven."

> >

> > I think Sanjy ji's lecture can be found on atri-SJC site.

> >

> > You really love music, don't you?:--)) Venus rules all Beauty,

> which

> > in the higher sense is Truth itself. Btw, Naada is an attribute

of

> > akasha, of Jupiter!

> >

> > I agree with you that any epiphanic moment in which one can

> > transcend oneself and glimpse the Infinite, is a moment with

> > God...like the one when Newton spotted the fateful apple

falling,

> or

> > when Einstein stumbled upon the relativity theory or the one

when

> > Arjuna was granted vishwaroopa sandarshanam!!

> >

> > Regards,

> > Lakshmi

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > > Also in another mail you have mentioned about Jupiter and

> > Ananda.True

> > > wisdom is ananda and hence Guru is karaka.Shukra gives

> > > Paramananda.Poets have said Anandam Anandanandam Jagadanandam

> > > sangeetham!!!.The bliss, Union ,confluence ,continous

flow,which

> > music

> > > can bestow is beyond words.Also continous integrated

> consciousness

> > is

> > > Brahmam.Shukra is for finer wisdom and Guru for broad

> wisdom.Nada

> > can

> > > permeate and open even the subtlest and finer openings within

us.

> > >

> > > Not only music ,if you can absorb the rasa oozing from the

> bhavas

> > on

> > > to which Padma subrahmaniam is merging,one can get closer.When

> > Sachin

> > > Tendulkar or Brian Lara sights a ball in advance,send a

stimulus

> to

> > > brain,transfer the signals to hand/feet and body,and play a

> stroke

> > > with timing and perfect balance,and everything happening

within

> > split

> > > of a second - It is Aananda for them !!!.In other words

> > > perfection,continous perfection is HIM.If we can union with

him

> > even

> > > for a second Ananda Rasa Oozes.

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > I am glad that we are converging on real learning now. As

the

> > Sage

> > > > Parashara summed up, all planets/beings are but

manifestations

> > of

> > > > the supreme spirit. Have you heard the amazing lecture given

> by

> > > > Sanjay ji on Varaha avatara (Rahu) and how it

> > governs/facilitates

> > > > birth (surfacing) of the body(prithvi)from the water

(amniotic

> > > > fluid?).

> > > >

> > > > Just one point. The body/mind/faculties already exist before

> the

> > > > soul enters it, animating all. I request you to read

Aitareya

> > > > upanishad for greater understanding of this concept.

> > > >

> > > > That's a lovely point about Rahu representing the

intersecting

> > point

> > > > of Atma and ManaH. However, is pull/attachment represented

by

> > Rahu,

> > > > who doesn't have a body and lacks the necessary mass to

cause

> > the

> > > > pull? It's Prithvi tattwa which causes attraction(Taurus-

earth

> > sign-

> > > > natural 2nd house, which governs attraction) and its the

jala

> > tattwa

> > > > which causes attachment (Cancer). So, all these

> > pulls/attractions

> > > > and attachments are caused by interplay of body and mind....

> and

> > not

> > > > by soul.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrasekhar ji might feel that since jala tattwa

represents

> > > > moksha, it can not indicate attachments. I request you to go

> > through

> > > > Lalithopaakhyanam to understand how "rasa" is vital to

> > > > attraction/attachment/creation and happiness.

> > > >

> > > > But I do agree that Rahu tends to magnify everything and

take

> > over

> > > > others' significations to such an extent that we forget who

is

> > the

> > > > real karaka and attribute all these to Rahu.

> > > >

> > > > Aham-ahanta is a huge and difficult topic and certainly not

to

> > be

> > > > attempted when one's (me, ofcourse)feeling extremely sleepy.

I

> > will

> > > > try to type out my understanding tomorrow if my sons permit

me

> > to

> > > > touch the computer, otherwise, we'll meet on Monday.

> > > >

> > > > So, good night and happy weekend:--))

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Lakshmi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , "vijayadas_pradeep"

> > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Lakshmi ji

> > > > >

> > > > > I humbly feel, as in essence we are the same, we are

> mutually

> > > > learning

> > > > > to cross the ocean of samsara,which is the very purpose of

> > taking

> > > > body.

> > > > > I am scribbling something based on the gains obtained

during

> > > > guidance/

> > > > > discussion from/with Chandrashekhar ji,you and other

learned

> > > > > members.Read the mail from Inderjit ji on EGO.Kindly check

> if

> > we

> > > > are

> > > > > on the right track.

> > > > >

> > > > > Aaditya Bhagawan or Sun is KalaSwaroopa.He creates Time.He

> is

> > > > karaka

> > > > > for our lagna/self and gives us eyesight,paurusha and is

the

> > subtle

> > > > > core in us.Let us Pray and Thank HIM for all the Light -

> > sustaining

> > > > > life. We are advocates, neither for Rahu nor for Sun.Let

> their

> > > > > strength,in our chart,not create any bias.

> > > > >

> > > > > It is ''mine'', is a dual feeling - Lord tells Arjuna -

> nothing

> > > > belongs

> > > > > to you!!. As long as a feeling of mine is present, there

is a

> > > > > separate, identity involved. This separate ''i'' is called

> EGO

> > or

> > > > > Ahamkar.This separate identity brings in Pride. For

example

> a

> > King

> > > > > might think ''i'' am strong, ''my'' army, 'my' wealth etc

> > > > resulting in

> > > > > Pride.Rahu is neither this ''i''(Ego) nor the Pride.

> > > > >

> > > > > Then who is ''i'' & who is Rahu?

> > > > >

> > > > > Brahman is the base.Maya for Brahman is Mind for

> Atman.Though

> > > > Atman is

> > > > > the same as Brahman,due to our dual feeling and for the

> > purpose of

> > > > > knowing who we are -we will assume it as an undivided but

> part

> > of

> > > > > Brahman.It is the effect of Maya/Mind.i happens due to

> > > > superimposition

> > > > > of atman and mind(internal organ) in both ways as per

> > Sankara.The

> > > > > jeevatma represented by Sun happening to be the first

entry

> as

> > far

> > > > as

> > > > > humanbeing is considered is viewed as a doer by mind.Atma

> as

> > well

> > > > > follows mind resulting in a cycle.The resulting dual

feeling

> of

> > > > > me/mine is ''í''.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > As long as we are within the clutches of Time, we have

Death

> > and

> > > > > Birth.KalaSarpam is that factor(formed through contact

> between

> > > > > atma/mana padhas(luni/solar paths) w.r to earth) making us

> > clutch

> > > > on

> > > > > to TIME/SPACE.This clutch results in attachment.Thus

> > intoxication

> > > > is

> > > > > nothing but a kind of addiction,magnetic pull which is

> > enhancing

> > > > the

> > > > > already present asscoiation with vishayas.Rahu is just

> keeping

> > > > > together the already manifested superimposition

> (Atma/Mind).The

> > > > level

> > > > > of Unmada depends on the state of mind or in astrology the

> > > > strength of

> > > > > moon and further associations.

> > > > >

> > > > > Rahu enhancing(attachment) the significations of Venus

does

> > not

> > > > make

> > > > > it a Venus!!!!.Similarly jeevatma is already in a cage(not

> > because

> > > > of

> > > > > Rahu).Rahu is not jeevatma or ''I''.Neither before

> realization

> > nor

> > > > > after, Rahu is ''I''.After realization ,jeevatma

identifies

> > itself

> > > > > with the Supreme(unsullied).Rahu release the clutch or in

> > other

> > > > words

> > > > > the gear is in neutral:-).Shankara burns Kamadeva.

> > > > >

> > > > > Detachment is a reversal and hence sage says one should

> think

> > of

> > > > feet

> > > > > through Meena/Rahu.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thus we have tried to understand what is Rahu,what is

> > EGO ,what is

> > > > > pride.They are three different entities.Now please tell me

> > what is

> > > > > Mada? - Is it 'I', Is it Pride or Is it - Intoxicated

> illusion

> > in

> > > > our

> > > > > context?.

> > > > >

> > > > > In reality there is only Brahman.But ignorance due to maya

> > (which is

> > > > > the imagination of lord(Saguna Roopa) surrounding him(but

> part

> > of

> > > > > him),brings in all these.Rahu as Kaala Sarpam acts as a

> > catalyst or

> > > > > clutch attaching one to earth -linking Time and space.

> > > > >

> > > > > If we have no thoughts in our mind and if the mind is still

> (if

> > it

> > > > is

> > > > > possible) then it is pindanda roopa of nirgun brahman.Kind

of

> > > > > Samadhi.When realization happens one reailizes who he is.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thus if think of creation - When imagination arise space

is

> > created

> > > > > and time is elapsed(kala sarpam comes into

picture).Brahman

> and

> > > > > Universe is similar.This is my humble beginning towards

> > > > understanding

> > > > > the sublime and far TRUTH.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thinking in retrospect, as I have written in the mail to

> > > > > > Chandrasekhar ji, perhaps we are wrong in interpreting

> > > > that "ego" is

> > > > > > found only in some people. If we interpret

> dispassionately,

> > > > perhaps

> > > > > > Kalyan Varma has been RIGHTLY saying all along that ego

(

> > > > necessary

> > > > > > for perpetuation of Creation) is present in every being,

> as

> > much

> > > > as

> > > > > > soul/mind or happiness/grief are present, yet I don't

find

> > us

> > > > > > fighting about them. we need to accept that I have ego,

> you

> > have

> > > > > > ego, chandrasekhar ji has ego...all of us have it,

perhaps

> > in

> > > > > > different degrees.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > How wrong was I to think that "ego" is peculiar only to

> some

> > > > > > people!! How wrong was i to think that we are

> > exceptions! "Ego"

> > > > is

> > > > > > part of the natural state of every individual...like the

> > > > kundalini

> > > > > > residing in mooladhara of every one.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Only a blessed few succeed in reversing this ego, in

> > dissolving

> > > > this

> > > > > > separateness. They cross this Vishnu Maaya and reach a

> state

> > of

> > > > > > Realization.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks for helping me reach this humbling yet

exhilerating

> > > > > > understanding. I have truly learnt something today.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Namaste Pradeep,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Only Kalyan Varma is mentioning.Kalyan Varma included

> > > > > > > > the illusionary factor which can catalyse all of the

> > above

> > > > and

> > > > > > > result

> > > > > > > > in dukham.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: I must remind you that The Kalyana Varma

> > reference

> > > > was

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > chosen by me. It was chosen by Chandrasekhar ji and

> > certified

> > > > to

> > > > > > be

> > > > > > > impeccable.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Can you tell me if any other astro-book says that

Saturn

> > gives

> > > > > > > contrary results (except in 8th house)? I do not

recall

> > > > > > > Parashara/Varahamihira saying it. If you can find it,

> > please

> > > > let

> > > > > > me

> > > > > > > know.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I must honestly say that Parashara/Varahamihira do not

> say

> > > > > > anything

> > > > > > > about Rahu representing "mada". But have they

explicitly

> > said

> > > > any

> > > > > > > thing about Sun having "ego" either? Were we not

drawing

> > > > > > convoluted

> > > > > > > conclusions then?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Should we quote a book when it suits us and dump it

when

> > it

> > > > > > doesn't?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Pradeep, please do not think that I am championing

> either

> > Sun

> > > > or

> > > > > > > Rahu. I am sure you have read the mail where I said

that

> > Rahu

> > > > is

> > > > > > > also capable of giving great spirituality when

involved

> in

> > > > such

> > > > > > > yogas. Infact what I have been fighting for all these

> days

> > is

> > > > for

> > > > > > > fair treatment of all planets.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Thus we have to look for the meaning suiting the

> > context.Why

> > > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > just one among the shad ripus?Why not

> > > > lust,kaama,moha,krodha?

> > > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > not any of these.He makes us have all these.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: You are very correct. Rahu is the generator

> > of "I"- a

> > > > > > false

> > > > > > > feeling as a separate entity, which is the basis of

ego

> > (as

> > > > > > > defined/argued by you in the earlier mails). This

> feeling

> > is

> > > > also

> > > > > > > the basis of the shadripus which are based on one

> > individual

> > > > being

> > > > > > > different from other.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Sun called as Atma karaka

> > > > > > > > is karaka for lagna in astrology.Am i wrong? Once he

> > enters

> > > > the

> > > > > > > body

> > > > > > > > he is trapped and just wanders wherever the mind is

> > > > > > taking ,until

> > > > > > > self

> > > > > > > > realization.Am i wrong?What is BHagavatham

mentioning

> > about

> > > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > soul and its plight.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Rahu does not enter on its own nor is it a feeling

> > > > of ''I''.It

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > our assumption.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Lakshmi: Since we are talking about astrology, can you

> > tell me

> > > > > > > why "kumbha" (pindanda)has been given the dual

lordship

> by

> > > > Saturn

> > > > > > > and Rahu? Why does birth take place? Because of karma

> > (Saturn)

> > > > and

> > > > > > > unsatisfied kaama (Rahu) or because of aatma? If birth

> > takes

> > > > place

> > > > > > > because of aatma, why should Aatma be unhappy or feel

> > trapped

> > > > in a

> > > > > > > body? I request you to reflect on these and answer.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Why is Rahu called "Kaala sarpam" and represents Time?

> > Does he

> > > > > > cause

> > > > > > > day/night? does he cause seasons? Then why? It's

because

> > he

> > > > causes

> > > > > > > the interminable birth cycle.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > According to your own/Chandrasekhar ji's previous e-

> > > > mails, "ego"

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > a false feeling of differentiation. Now you yourself

> have

> > said

> > > > > > > that " Rahu the intoxication or illusion surrounding

us

> > giving

> > > > us

> > > > > > a

> > > > > > > smoky/obscurant idea".

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I agree with all that you say. Now putting all this

> > together,

> > > > > > please

> > > > > > > tell me if Rahu does not give a

> > illusiory/intoxicated/false

> > > > idea

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > oneself.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Btw, I really appreciate the way you research and i

> > understand

> > > > the

> > > > > > > way you feel about Rahu. I again reiterate that I have

> > nothing

> > > > > > > against Rahu...my own Rahu dasa is excellent and is

> > bringing

> > > > me

> > > > > > > immense spiritual benefits, like the present

discussion:-

> -

> > ))

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Thanks

> > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

, "b_lakshmi_ramesh"

> > > > > > > > <b_lakshmi_ramesh@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji & Pradeep ji,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I recollect writing in my previous e-mails, that

the

> > > > shloka

> > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > Saravali talks about the inner qualities of an

> > > > > > > > > individual/kalapurusha. Does the word "mada" imply

> > > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > > an inner quality? Does the word "intoxication"

> belong

> > in

> > > > that

> > > > > > > > > context, in that group?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I do not think either of you responded to that.

> > perhaps

> > > > you

> > > > > > > missed

> > > > > > > > > it out in the avalanche of e-mails:--))

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Can i have your response(s) please?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > ,

Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Pride is different from ego. Like it or not Mada

> > does

> > > > mean

> > > > > > > > > intoxication

> > > > > > > > > > or lust. The Kama that is referred to relates to

> > kaamana

> > > > > > which

> > > > > > > > > means

> > > > > > > > > > desires for things possessed by others. That is

> what

> > > > Asteya,

> > > > > > > one

> > > > > > > > > of the

> > > > > > > > > > Yamas of Hatha yogas refer to.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > We are talking about auspiciousness or other

wise

> of

> > the

> > > > > > > dormant

> > > > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > awakened Kundalini. As I said all scriptures can

> be

> > > > > > > misinterpreted

> > > > > > > > > if

> > > > > > > > > > one wants to do that. But that does not serve

any

> > > > purpose. I

> > > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > > go into what exactly is meant by Vidya and

Avidya

> > > > related to

> > > > > > > Maa.

> > > > > > > > > I have

> > > > > > > > > > not yet seen any Pramana, in the form of a

shloka,

> > to

> > > > > > support

> > > > > > > your

> > > > > > > > > > proposition that dormant Kundalini is

inauspicious

> > and

> > > > the

> > > > > > > > > awakened

> > > > > > > > > > Kundalini is auspicious so far. I have already

> > posted

> > > > the

> > > > > > way

> > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > generation has been taught to accept an

argument,

> so

> > I

> > > > shall

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > repeat

> > > > > > > > > > it here.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > But I will not resort to conjectures and would

> like

> > to

> > > > quote

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > Rudrayamala tantra about the swarUpa of dormant

> > > > Kundalini.

> > > > > > > Being

> > > > > > > > > > graduate in sanskrit, I am sure I will not have

to

> > > > translate

> > > > > > > it

> > > > > > > > > for you.

> > > > > > > > > > Aaxare prdevta Éìjntax> k…{flI devta

> > > > > > > > > > ädhäre paradevatä bhavrajanatädhaù kuëòalé devatä

> > > > > > > > > > devanamixdevta iÇjgtamanNdpuÃiSwta,

> > > > > > > > > > devänämadhidevatä trijagatämänandapuïjasthitä|

> > > > > > > > > > mUlaxarinvaisnI iÇrm[i ya }ainnI mailnI

> > > > > > > > > > mülädhäraniväsiné triramaëé yä jïäniné mäliné

> > > > > > > > > > sa me mat&mnuiSwta k…lpwanNdEkbIjanna.32,21.

> > > > > > > > > > sä me mätåmanusthitä

> > kulapathänandaikabéjänanä||32|21||

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I am sure you must have some quote to support

your

> > > > > > contention.

> > > > > > > I

> > > > > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > like to see the shloka, as against conjectures,

so

> > that

> > > > I

> > > > > > can

> > > > > > > > > improve

> > > > > > > > > > upon my knowledge of the swarupaa of Kundalini.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I can understand your reluctance to support your

> > > > > > propositions

> > > > > > > with

> > > > > > > > > > suitable pramanas. I am sorry if I have hurt you

> by

> > > > pointing

> > > > > > > out

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > inconsistency in the way you treated Surya and

> Rahu

> > > > > > > combinations

> > > > > > > > > in two

> > > > > > > > > > different chart as stand out combinations only.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I had no intention to cause any hurt to you and

if

> I

> > > > have

> > > > > > done

> > > > > > > so

> > > > > > > > > > inadvertently I crave your pardon.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > The shadripus are kaama (lust), krodha

(anger),

> > lobha

> > > > > > > (greed),

> > > > > > > > > moha

> > > > > > > > > > > (attachment, delusion), mada (pride) and

> maatsarya

> > > > > > (jealousy)

> > > > > > > > > > > If "mada" means "lust" what does "kaama" imply

> > among

> > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > shadripus? "Mada" signifies one who is

> > > > intoxicated/drunk

> > > > > > with

> > > > > > > > > > > power/self-grandeur (pride/ego).

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Mother is known as "Vidya and avidya

swaroopini"

> > and

> > > > > > correct

> > > > > > > > > > > appreciation of Mother includes understanding

of

> > both

> > > > > > > facets. As

> > > > > > > > > > > Shakti, She respresents raw power which can be

> > routed

> > > > > > > towards

> > > > > > > > > good

> > > > > > > > > > > deeds as well as bad deeds. Are both ends the

> > same?

> > > > The

> > > > > > > wisdom,

> > > > > > > > > > > required to put this immense shakti to good

use,

> > is

> > > > > > > represented

> > > > > > > > > by

> > > > > > > > > > > Shiva, hence the union of Shiva and Parvati,

> > wisdom

> > > > and

> > > > > > > power, is

> > > > > > > > > > > said to be auspicious because it ensures the

> > > > > > > correct/judicious

> > > > > > > > > end

> > > > > > > > > > > use of shakti. Hence the orientation of Shakti

> is

> > very

> > > > very

> > > > > > > > > > > important.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I always said that Soorya is both sattwik and

> > krura. I

> > > > > > also

> > > > > > > > > always

> > > > > > > > > > > said all planets, including Jupiter, can give

> > malefic

> > > > > > > results, if

> > > > > > > > > > > they are functionally empowered to do so. You

> can

> > > > refer to

> > > > > > > all my

> > > > > > > > > > > previous mails to confirm this.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Sir, Truth is much more important than winning

> or

> > > > losing an

> > > > > > > > > > > argument. All discussions must proceed as an

> > > > exploration

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > celebration of Truth. When this is not the

case,

> I

> > see

> > > > no

> > > > > > > > > purpose in

> > > > > > > > > > > continuing these discussions.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > <%40>,

> > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Having Icchamrityu and dying at an early age

> are

> > > > > > operating

> > > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > > > > different

> > > > > > > > > > > > levels. Bhishma had Iccha Mrityu but did not

> die

> > > > young.

> > > > > > So

> > > > > > > > > please

> > > > > > > > > > > do not

> > > > > > > > > > > > try to mix the issues. If you have read

> > Swamiji's

> > > > > > > biography you

> > > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > > find that he fell sick many times despite of

> > > > apparent

> > > > > > > robust

> > > > > > > > > > > physique.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Commenting on Shani in 4th for Rama's chart

> > confirms

> > > > > > with

> > > > > > > his

> > > > > > > > > > > being

> > > > > > > > > > > > capable of giving Vipareeta results. I did

not

> > know

> > > > I

> > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > expected

> > > > > > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > analyze the entire chart. By the way if

there

> is

> > a

> > > > Kuja

> > > > > > > dosha

> > > > > > > > > how

> > > > > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > > > that by itself give a Divine wife? Please do

> not

> > > > bring

> > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > > devotion to

> > > > > > > > > > > > Lord Rama (and we both have that) into

> > astrological

> > > > > > > analysis of

> > > > > > > > > > > his chart.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Bringing in the dashas when the discussions

> are

> > on

> > > > the

> > > > > > > effects

> > > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > will only lead the discussion to no where.

The

> > two

> > > > have

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > seen

> > > > > > > > > > > > separately as we are not trying to time an

> event

> > but

> > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > trying

> > > > > > > > > > > to find

> > > > > > > > > > > > what are the effects on bhavas occupied.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lakshmi in Ramana Maharshi's chart you

> have

> > > > perhaps

> > > > > > > > > forgotten

> > > > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > saying Kuja vat Ketu. look at the Ketu deha

in

> > that

> > > > > > > perspective

> > > > > > > > > > > and let

> > > > > > > > > > > > me know your views. And if by the way you

read

> > my

> > > > mail,

> > > > > > I

> > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > > > say

> > > > > > > > > > > > anything about mars being killer for him,

only

> > that

> > > > it

> > > > > > > gave him

> > > > > > > > > > > Sarcoma

> > > > > > > > > > > > being 3rd lord.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Also could you explain why Sun being Atma

and

> > always

> > > > > > > > > beneficent as

> > > > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > > have claimed all along in the thread on the

> > topic,

> > > > did

> > > > > > its

> > > > > > > > > > > Mahadasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > prove to be Killer to Ramana Maharshi?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Take care,

> > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > For example, remember that in Swami

> > > > Vivekananda's

> > > > > > > chart

> > > > > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th occupying the lagna and causing

a

> > > > powerful

> > > > > > Raj

> > > > > > > > > yoga. At

> > > > > > > > > > > > > the same

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > time if you thin how long the Swamiji

> lived,

> > you

> > > > may

> > > > > > > have

> > > > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > think

> > > > > > > > > > > > > again

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > about saying that it did not act as

> > Mahakrura.

> > > > Think

> > > > > > > about

> > > > > > > > > > > what it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > did

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to the 7th bhava of Swamiji, also,

before

> > > > declaring

> > > > > > > that it

> > > > > > > > > > > became

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha or less malefic.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: I think Swamiji had an

icchamrityu

> > and

> > > > > > looking

> > > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > dass

> > > > > > > > > > > > > operating on 4th July 1902, I observe that

> he

> > > > passed

> > > > > > > away in

> > > > > > > > > Jup-

> > > > > > > > > > > Ven-

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup-Ket-Sat-Sat.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup MD: 1893-02-09 (1:35:30 pm) - 1909-02-

10

> > > > (3:59:13

> > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ven AD: 1900-12-25 (10:03:30 am) - 1903-08-

> 27

> > > > (4:48:54

> > > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup PD: 1902-05-02 (1:42:07 pm) - 1902-09-

12

> > > > (10:43:55

> > > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ket SD: 1902-06-29 (9:11:48 am) - 1902-07-

07

> > > > (5:06:28

> > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat PAD: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-

> 06

> > > > (2:29:24

> > > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat: 1902-07-04 (8:44:27 pm) - 1902-07-05

> > (1:27:03

> > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jupiter is in 2nd house from Moon, Venus

is

> > the

> > > > 2nd

> > > > > > lord

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > > > > > > and is posited in 2nd from lagna, Ketu is

in

> > the

> > > > house

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > Venus

> > > > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > gives the results of Venus and Saturn is

the

> > 2nd

> > > > lord

> > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna....all are marakas. the maraka

> > > > significations

> > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > > stronger

> > > > > > > > > > > > > from Moon, and it's the cause of his early

> > death.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > I fail to see where Sun comes into all

this.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > However, I agree that Sun, as AK aspecting

> 7th

> > > > house,

> > > > > > > can

> > > > > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > > > > parivraja tendencies. But can you ignore

the

> > > > influence

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > Saturn

> > > > > > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Moon and 4th house, occuring in the 10th

> > house? I

> > > > am

> > > > > > > sure

> > > > > > > > > even

> > > > > > > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun would have given him parivraja yoga:--

))

> > but

> > > > > > without

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > raja

> > > > > > > > > > > > > yoga and the strong soul-level impact he

> > created

> > > > > > > wherever he

> > > > > > > > > > > went.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Or if you like look at what happened to

the

> 7th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhava of Lord Rama with exalted Mars in

> the

> > 7th

> > > > > > bhava.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars in 7th gives kuja dosha, and I think

> the

> > > > strong

> > > > > > > Mars in

> > > > > > > > > 7th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > gave him an exalted wife like Sita. You

have

> > not

> > > > > > > commented

> > > > > > > > > on the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > exalted Saturn in 4th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > In each of the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > example provided by you look at the

bhava

> > that

> > > > the

> > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > > occupy

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (barring Saturn, for reasons already

> stated

> > in

> > > > > > > previous

> > > > > > > > > mail),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > without

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > looking at the charts as belonging to

> great

> > > > people,

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > then

> > > > > > > > > > > make

> > > > > > > > > > > > > up

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > your mind as to the truth or otherwise

of

> > what I

> > > > > > said.

> > > > > > > Did

> > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > know

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi died following a

malignant

> > > > sarcoma

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > left

> > > > > > > > > hand

> > > > > > > > > > > > > and Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > is karaka for the 3rd bhava in 8th in

his

> > chart,

> > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > exaltation. Do

> > > > > > > > > > > > > you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > think Mars gave him benevolent results?

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I also request you to

examine

> > the

> > > > > > > following

> > > > > > > > > dasa

> > > > > > > > > > > > > sequences with an open mind. Sun is the

3rd

> > lord

> > > > from

> > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > > (AK) &

> > > > > > > > > > > > > 12th lord from lagna in Sri Ramana's

chart,

> > rahu

> > > > is

> > > > > > with

> > > > > > > Sun

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > gives Sun'/Saturn's/Jupiter's

effects...all

> of

> > > > which

> > > > > > > point to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > dusthanas, Saturn is a maraka in 7th house

> and

> > > > ketu

> > > > > > can

> > > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > effects of Moon/Mercury/mars. Mar's

effect,

> if

> > at

> > > > all,

> > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > indirect, and he was not the killer.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Vimsottari Dasa (started from Moon):

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun MD: 1949-02-03 (1:02:22 am) - 1955-02-

03

> > > > (2:05:32

> > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Rah AD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1951-02-

21

> > > > (8:49:14

> > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Rah PD: 1950-03-29 (3:54:04 am) - 1950-05-

18

> > > > (12:04:47

> > > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat SD: 1950-04-12 (3:37:16 am) - 1950-04-

20

> > > > (12:18:02

> > > > > > > am)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ket PAD: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-

04-

> 14

> > > > > > (11:08:26

> > > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Deha-antardasas in this PAD:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ket: 1950-04-14 (12:08:34 pm) - 1950-04-14

> > > > (12:47:04

> > > > > > pm)

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think what stands out is the fact that

the

> > dasa

> > > > of

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > conjoined Moon brought about death. I

think

> > their

> > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > willed the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > death.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Can a planet give results in a dasa totally

> > > > > > > > > > > unrelated/unassociated

> > > > > > > > > > > > > with itself? I request you to consider the

> > above

> > > > > > > objectively.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > I will talk about the other charts/issues

in

> > my

> > > > next

> > > > > > > mail.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > In Paramhans Ramkrishna's chart,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I do not know where you find Mars strong

> as

> > a

> > > > planet

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > debilitation in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Navamsha gives results of debility even

> when

> > in

> > > > > > > exaltation

> > > > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > rasi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > chart. In case of Saturn Viparitam shane

> > smritam

> > > > has

> > > > > > > > > already

> > > > > > > > > > > been

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned by me, in earlier mail.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi: Sir, I myself have not considered

> > > > Mars/Venus

> > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > Thakur's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > chart because they are debilitated. Please

> go

> > > > through

> > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > message

> > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I was talking about Saturn and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > About Shri Aurobindo, I trust you are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > aware of his revolutionary background

and

> > that

> > > > he

> > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > editor

> > > > > > > > > > > of a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > paper

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Vande Mataram" not much known for its

> soft

> > > > language.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Same is the case with strong Malefics

> giving

> > > > P.M.

> > > > > > > Yogas.

> > > > > > > > > Every

> > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > capable of 12 variations of a P.M. Yoga

> > > > attributed

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > it,

> > > > > > > > > at

> > > > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > very

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > least. It would only be naive to imagine

> > they

> > > > would

> > > > > > > all

> > > > > > > > > give

> > > > > > > > > > > > > identical

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > results as indicated by Parashara or all

> > with

> > > > Pancha

> > > > > > > > > > > Mahapurusha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yoga

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > would only rule over different parts of

> > India

> > > > > > (barring

> > > > > > > > > Saturn),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > just

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > because the sage said so. The sages gave

> us

> > > > > > principles

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > expected us

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to apply them to real life horoscope

using

> > > > Viveka.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would gladly give you the shloka

giving

> > the

> > > > > > > reference to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Viparita---Shane..." it is from an old

> > classic

> > > > > > > respected

> > > > > > > > > > > amongst

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > astrologers, but as you do not seem to

> > accept

> > > > > > anything

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > does

> > > > > > > > > > > > > not fit

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in with what, you think. is said by Dr.

> > Raman,

> > > > it

> > > > > > > would be

> > > > > > > > > an

> > > > > > > > > > > > > exercise

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in futility. should you yet want the

> shloka

> > I

> > > > would

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > course

> > > > > > > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > glad to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > give it to you.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You seem to be disagreeing with Shri

> B.V.

> > > > Raman

> > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > > > > planets,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whether malefic or benefics give good

> > results,

> > > > > > while

> > > > > > > weak

> > > > > > > > > > > planets

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give bad results. Perhaps you also

> > disagree

> > > > about

> > > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving mahapurusha yogas. Isn't it

> > contrary to

> > > > > > what

> > > > > > > all

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > jyotish

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > texts teach?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, here are a few examples, where I

> > find

> > > > that

> > > > > > > strong

> > > > > > > > > > > malefics

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have neither made the natives krura

nor

> > that

> > > > their

> > > > > > > > > > > significations

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > suffered.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda: strong sun in lagna

> and

> > > > mars in

> > > > > > > 5th

> > > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Aurobindo: Strong Sun in 2nd house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maharshi Mahesh yogi: exalted Mars in

> > lagna.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ramana Maharshi: strong Mars in 8th

house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: Exalted

> Saturn

> > > > (9H)

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > (4H).

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and Venus are also exalted in rasi,

> while

> > > > > > > debilitated in

> > > > > > > > > > > navamsa.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir, can you give me the reference

> > > > for "vipareetam

> > > > > > > shaneH

> > > > > > > > > > > > > sritam"?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it, by any chance, refer to

> Saturn's

> > > > > > placement

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > 8th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being beneficial?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am happy that you agree strong

Saturn

> > gives

> > > > good

> > > > > > > > > results.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me from where the saying

is

> > > > because i

> > > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > > like to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > read it up myself and understand.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Chandrashekhar

<chandrashekhar46@

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46%

> > 40.co.uk>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Krura planets the saying

is,

> > that

> > > > with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength the Krura grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more Krura (Maha-krura)

and

> > the

> > > > > > shubha

> > > > > > > > > grahas

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become more shubha.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only Shani is more krura when

weak

> > and

> > > > > > > beneficial

> > > > > > > > > or

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > less krura when

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong "Viparitama shaneH

smritam".

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My sun dasa started when I was

9

> > years

> > > > > > old,

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ended when I was 15

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > years old. How come you didn't

> > notice

> > > > the

> > > > > > > second

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > part? I was old

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough to understand the

> > difference

> > > > between

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > success and failure, I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guess!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you agree that Rahu

> is

> > > > giving

> > > > > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results, and those

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are exceptionally

good,

> > then it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > automatically follows that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun is strong in my chart

> because

> > > > > > according

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri B.V Raman, evil

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > planets, especially when weak,

> > give

> > > > bad

> > > > > > > results

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (vide "a catechism

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of astrology"), while strong

> > planets,

> > > > even

> > > > > > if

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evil, give good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. If my Sun were weak,

he

> > > > wouldn't

> > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving such good

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Mercury is hopelessly

> > combust

> > > > and

> > > > > > > inferior

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in shadbala

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strength, the major results of

> > Dharma

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karmadhipathi yoga are also

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > given by Sun, because

according

> > to "300

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combinations" of Sri

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman, a planet with higher

> > shadbala

> > > > is

> > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > likely to give the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of a yoga.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding Karna, I request you

> to

> > read

> > > > the

> > > > > > > Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parva of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mahabharata again. When he

died,

> > the

> > > > > > nature

> > > > > > > bowed

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in grief, because

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > he's one of the noblest

persons

> in

> > > > > > > Mahabharata.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even the episode you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted happened because

> > Parashurama

> > > > would

> > > > > > > teach

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only Brahmins and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna desperately wanted to

> learn

> > > > > > > dhanurvidya

> > > > > > > > > from

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashurama so

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he can support

Duryodhana.

> > Deceit

> > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > certainly punishable and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did pay dearly. But it's

> to

> > be

> > > > borne

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > mind

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that whatever

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karna did was only to please

> > > > Duryodhana,

> > > > > > his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dearest friend. Karna

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did not gain anything

personally.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the 3rd house

from

> > 8th

> > > > house

> > > > > > (I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > think there was a typo

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at your end). In the natural

> > zodiac,

> > > > the

> > > > > > 10

> > > > > > > th

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sign, being the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cardinal earth sign,

represents

> > > > > > > south /dakshina

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > disha. South is the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > direction ruled by Yama, the

> lord

> > of

> > > > > > death,

> > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > represents burial grounds. So,

> the

> > > > Rudras

> > > > > > > > > (Saturn,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Mars) are

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strong in south. Also, Sun

> resides

> > in

> > > > > > south

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > starts his

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > northern voyage from here. So

he

> > has

> > > > > > digbala

> > > > > > > in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did clarify that when I

> referred

> > to

> > > > > > Surya

> > > > > > > as

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karma saakshi, it's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only to his status as

antaraatma

> > and

> > > > not

> > > > > > as a

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deity. Perhaps this

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escaped your attention.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my last post on the

> > subject.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> >

> > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

> 40>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%

> > > > 40>,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Divine Lakshmi,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You were too young for the

> > results

> > > > of

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to manifest,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is good news that your

father

> > had

> > > > > > > promotions

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prizes/accolades during that

> > time.

> > > > It is

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting to know you

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > got

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these results at a young age

> of

> > 9 or

> > > > so

> > > > > > as

> > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is when Sun dasha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > operative. I am relieved you

> did

> > not

> > > > > > have

> > > > > > > any

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > health problems in

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > March-August 1970 period.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But we are talking about

Rahu

> > and

> > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > would

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give results of Sun

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prominently, by conjunction,

> as

> > you

> > > > > > > guessed but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also that of

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You have a

> Dharmakarmaadhipati

> > yoga

> > > > > > after

> > > > > > > all)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that is why I

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for understanding Sun its

> dasha

> > > > instead

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > Rahu

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha needs to be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analyzed.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mercury is malefic not

because

> I

> > say

> > > > so

> > > > > > but

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because Jyotish says

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mercury is malefic when

> conjunct

> > a

> > > > papa

> > > > > > > graha

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and he is conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun and Rahu.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th house is the apex of

> Artha

> > > > trikona

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly involved with

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > efforts to earn money.

Though

> > > > claimed to

> > > > > > be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana/burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground, it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 4th from ayush sthana

(8th)

> > and

> > > > its

> > > > > > > home

> > > > > > > > > that

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is why affliction

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can give death. But 8th is

> more

> > > > > > popularly

> > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mrityu sthana and

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th is called Smashana. If

it

> > is

> > > > really

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smashana why would it be

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > called

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > karma sthana and why would

Sun

> > be at

> > > > its

> > > > > > > most

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brilliant there?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not say he can not

> > represent

> > > > water

> > > > > > > bodies

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in temple, but not

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Om Gurave Namah

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Chandrasekhar ji,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My Sun dasa was excellent

> too.

> > My

> > > > > > father

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > received promotion(s),

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > my

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > school/college days were

> great

> > and

> > > > i

> > > > > > > received

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wide acclaim/prizes

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for my ability in creative

> > > > writing,

> > > > > > > Veena,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quiz contests etc,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apart

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from studies. So, for a

> > student, I

> > > > > > guess

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's excellent!!

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you justify this,

if

> > Sun

> > > > were

> > > > > > > weak?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rahu is certainly

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the yogakaraka results,

but

> > being

> > > > in

> > > > > > > Sun's

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house and being

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conjunct

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sun, don't you think Rahu

is

> > also

> > > > > > giving

> > > > > > > the

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results of Sun? You

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said that mercury is

malefic

> > and

> > > > > > heavily

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combust too:--))

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1th house also represent

> burial

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ground/smashaana. Is that a place

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for attachment?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra represents all

water

> > > > bodies,

> > > > > > so

> > > > > > > why

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can't he represent

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temple tank?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lakshmi

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated ===

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the

> > best

> > > > spam

> > > > > > > > > protection

> > > > > > > > > > > > > around

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > <>

> > > > > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > <

> <>

> > > > > > > > > > > <

<>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <

> > <>

> > > > > > > > > > > < <>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > <

> <>

> > > > > > > > > > > <

<>>>>

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> --

> > ----

> > > > ----

> > > > > > --

> > > > > > > ----

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

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

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-

> date.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > > > > > 268.11.7/435 -

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8/31/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message

> have

> > been

> > > > > > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> --

> > ----

> > > > ----

> > > > > > --

> > > > > > > ----

> > > > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming

message.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > > > 268.12.2/441 -

> > > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > 9/7/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have

> been

> > > > removed]

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> --

> > ----

> > > > ----

> > > > > > --

> > > > > > > -

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

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

> > 268.12.2/442 -

> > > > > > > Release

> > > > > > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > >

________

> > > > > > > > > > > > Try the all-new Mail. "The New

Version

> is

> > > > > > radically

> > > > > > > > > easier

> > > > > > > > > > > to use" – The Wall Street Journal

> > > > > > > > > > > > http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html

> > > > > > > > > > > <http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html>

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

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

--

> --

> > ----

> > > > ----

> > > > > > --

> > > > > > > ----

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

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database:

268.12.2/442 -

>

> > > > Release

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > 9/8/2006

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > _________

> > > > > > > > > > Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC

> > calling

> > > > > > > worldwide

> > > > > > > > > with voicemail http://uk.messenger.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>