House vs. Sign - which is more important?Correction question

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

 

How then, do you explain the factor known as rashi strength by

Parashara and Jaimini when determining which of the two lords shall

be deemed to be the lord for Aquarius or Scorpio as described in

chara dasha determination?

 

Are we now to pick and choose which indicator of strength we can

choose? One for chara dasha, another for awastha (as mentioned by

you), one for simple bala and so on! This can get very muddy, soon.

Almost as muddy as the ayanamsha! There have even been anecdotal

statements where jyotishis have recommended using one ayanamsha in

the same chart for chandra and another one for the different

indicators!

 

Like I said several times, please do not separate the two faces of

the coin, rashi and sign, and if one does and finds one side is

heavier, then one was working with a biased, unfair and dishonest

coin to begin with, anyway! There is no need for that or such fine

level dissection as rashi vs bhava! Therefore, we have the whole sign

house system!

 

RR

 

 

, "Rajesh M. Kumaria"

<rajeshkumaria2000 wrote:

>

> Wrong: "The strength of sign determines the

> strength of its controllong lord for any particular house "

>

> Correction: The strength of sign determines the

> strength of the planet occuping that sign, for any particular

> house. The planet occupying any sign can be its controlling lord or

> any other planet.

>

> The degrees of the sign at which the planet resides in the sign

give

> the strength factor i.e., balyavastha, yuva-awastha(full strength

> range), vridhaawastha(old age strength) etc.,

>

> , "Rajesh M. Kumaria"

> <rajeshkumaria2000@> wrote:

> >

> > Yes I think you are right Sir, The strength of sign determines

the

> > strength of its controllong lord for any particular house i.e.,

> ALso

> > the Lords of various signs become malefic/benfic depending upon

> the

> > Lagna, Kendras, Upachayas and Apokilimas signs i.e., Natural

> Benfics

> > become Functional malefic if they occupy kendras and vice-versa

> > etc., So Signs and houses are critically related as per basic of

> > this science(any good author's book can give all these

> > combinations)...Planet's own signs, exaltation sign, debilitation

> > signs, mooltrikona signs etc., I think once the natal planet's

> > strength based on its sign lordship and house positioning is

> > determined, then one can go into dasa systems and apply various

> > dasa system rules...from that point onwards the house placements

> > with respect to Lagna and/or house placements with respect to

> > MahaDasa Lordships becomes critical for prediction points of view

> > (which Is what I am still learning)...no wonder people get

> confused

> > whether sign is important or house is important? Infact the

actual

> > thing is that natal planet's strength and poistioning is closely

> > related to both its actual sign placement and house placment....

(I

> > could go on but I thnk I should stop here since the rest is open

> to

> > actual prediction, investigations, expereiences and books only).

> >

> > , "sagar.astro"

> > <sagar.astro@> wrote:

> > >

> > > , "iam_1972" <iam_1972@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Learned astrologers: please comment on whether the House is

> > more

> > > > important or whether the Sign is more important? Thank you

> > kindly.

> > > >

> > > evry house has its own departments and sphares represented by

it

> > they

> > > always remain same irrespective of the sighn that house falls

in

> > it

> > > will represent only those matteres only assiened to it, but

> > according

> > > to the sighn those matters either improve or become weak,if the

> > sighn

> > > is weaker or strong, because every sighn itself belongs to a

> > > particular house of KAAL PURSHA .

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear RR ji

I agree with you that this sign strength factor can get really

complicated/muddy...yes, also to be honest both sign and house are

critical for any natal planet's effects in various antardasas etc.,

 

Anyway without going further into this complicated topic, all i want

to convey is that the members/querrants should become aware of the

importance of sign and house, by reading various articles from BPHS

and other scriptures/authors. I think whatever I wanted to say in

this topic is already complete here and rest is upto one's own

investigations, judgements, experimentation/analysis and further

studies of this complicated subject.

Thanks and Regards

Rajesh Kumaria

 

 

, "Rohiniranjan"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Dear Sir,

>

> How then, do you explain the factor known as rashi strength by

> Parashara and Jaimini when determining which of the two lords

shall

> be deemed to be the lord for Aquarius or Scorpio as described in

> chara dasha determination?

>

> Are we now to pick and choose which indicator of strength we can

> choose? One for chara dasha, another for awastha (as mentioned by

> you), one for simple bala and so on! This can get very muddy,

soon.

> Almost as muddy as the ayanamsha! There have even been anecdotal

> statements where jyotishis have recommended using one ayanamsha in

> the same chart for chandra and another one for the different

> indicators!

>

> Like I said several times, please do not separate the two faces of

> the coin, rashi and sign, and if one does and finds one side is

> heavier, then one was working with a biased, unfair and dishonest

> coin to begin with, anyway! There is no need for that or such fine

> level dissection as rashi vs bhava! Therefore, we have the whole

sign

> house system!

>

> RR

>

>

> , "Rajesh M. Kumaria"

> <rajeshkumaria2000@> wrote:

> >

> > Wrong: "The strength of sign determines the

> > strength of its controllong lord for any particular house "

> >

> > Correction: The strength of sign determines the

> > strength of the planet occuping that sign, for any particular

> > house. The planet occupying any sign can be its controlling lord

or

> > any other planet.

> >

> > The degrees of the sign at which the planet resides in the sign

> give

> > the strength factor i.e., balyavastha, yuva-awastha(full

strength

> > range), vridhaawastha(old age strength) etc.,

> >

> > , "Rajesh M. Kumaria"

> > <rajeshkumaria2000@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Yes I think you are right Sir, The strength of sign determines

> the

> > > strength of its controllong lord for any particular house

i.e.,

> > ALso

> > > the Lords of various signs become malefic/benfic depending

upon

> > the

> > > Lagna, Kendras, Upachayas and Apokilimas signs i.e., Natural

> > Benfics

> > > become Functional malefic if they occupy kendras and vice-

versa

> > > etc., So Signs and houses are critically related as per basic

of

> > > this science(any good author's book can give all these

> > > combinations)...Planet's own signs, exaltation sign,

debilitation

> > > signs, mooltrikona signs etc., I think once the natal planet's

> > > strength based on its sign lordship and house positioning is

> > > determined, then one can go into dasa systems and apply

various

> > > dasa system rules...from that point onwards the house

placements

> > > with respect to Lagna and/or house placements with respect to

> > > MahaDasa Lordships becomes critical for prediction points of

view

> > > (which Is what I am still learning)...no wonder people get

> > confused

> > > whether sign is important or house is important? Infact the

> actual

> > > thing is that natal planet's strength and poistioning is

closely

> > > related to both its actual sign placement and house

placment....

> (I

> > > could go on but I thnk I should stop here since the rest is

open

> > to

> > > actual prediction, investigations, expereiences and books

only).

> > >

> > > , "sagar.astro"

> > > <sagar.astro@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > , "iam_1972"

<iam_1972@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Learned astrologers: please comment on whether the House

is

> > > more

> > > > > important or whether the Sign is more important? Thank

you

> > > kindly.

> > > > >

> > > > evry house has its own departments and sphares represented

by

> it

> > > they

> > > > always remain same irrespective of the sighn that house

falls

> in

> > > it

> > > > will represent only those matteres only assiened to it, but

> > > according

> > > > to the sighn those matters either improve or become weak,if

the

> > > sighn

> > > > is weaker or strong, because every sighn itself belongs to a

> > > > particular house of KAAL PURSHA .

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Rajesh ji,

 

If I may be tolerated for my two cents more without invoking anyone's

wrath and impatience, my belief is that astrology is really fairly

simple. The complexity and muddiness arises from two reasons,

paradoxically opposite:

 

a) when information is missing, as in old texts getting corrupted or

broken otherwise.

 

b) when in overzealousness or trying to impose the scientific and

logical model on astrology, individuals -- generally beginners but

not necessarily all beginners begin to tease out this factor and that

factor and lose sight of the fact that it is a whole. Milk can be

separated into its components and chemicals but then it cannot be

reconstituted back simply to form the nourishing and tasty milk

again! Something gets badly mangled in the process of dissection and

over analysis.

 

RR

 

, "Rajesh M. Kumaria"

<rajeshkumaria2000 wrote:

>

> Dear RR ji

> I agree with you that this sign strength factor can get really

> complicated/muddy...yes, also to be honest both sign and house are

> critical for any natal planet's effects in various antardasas etc.,

>

> Anyway without going further into this complicated topic, all i

want

> to convey is that the members/querrants should become aware of the

> importance of sign and house, by reading various articles from BPHS

> and other scriptures/authors. I think whatever I wanted to say in

> this topic is already complete here and rest is upto one's own

> investigations, judgements, experimentation/analysis and further

> studies of this complicated subject.

> Thanks and Regards

> Rajesh Kumaria

>

>

> , "Rohiniranjan"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sir,

> >

> > How then, do you explain the factor known as rashi strength by

> > Parashara and Jaimini when determining which of the two lords

> shall

> > be deemed to be the lord for Aquarius or Scorpio as described in

> > chara dasha determination?

> >

> > Are we now to pick and choose which indicator of strength we can

> > choose? One for chara dasha, another for awastha (as mentioned by

> > you), one for simple bala and so on! This can get very muddy,

> soon.

> > Almost as muddy as the ayanamsha! There have even been anecdotal

> > statements where jyotishis have recommended using one ayanamsha

in

> > the same chart for chandra and another one for the different

> > indicators!

> >

> > Like I said several times, please do not separate the two faces

of

> > the coin, rashi and sign, and if one does and finds one side is

> > heavier, then one was working with a biased, unfair and dishonest

> > coin to begin with, anyway! There is no need for that or such

fine

> > level dissection as rashi vs bhava! Therefore, we have the whole

> sign

> > house system!

> >

> > RR

> >

> >

> > , "Rajesh M. Kumaria"

> > <rajeshkumaria2000@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Wrong: "The strength of sign determines the

> > > strength of its controllong lord for any particular house "

> > >

> > > Correction: The strength of sign determines the

> > > strength of the planet occuping that sign, for any particular

> > > house. The planet occupying any sign can be its controlling

lord

> or

> > > any other planet.

> > >

> > > The degrees of the sign at which the planet resides in the sign

> > give

> > > the strength factor i.e., balyavastha, yuva-awastha(full

> strength

> > > range), vridhaawastha(old age strength) etc.,

> > >

> > > , "Rajesh M. Kumaria"

> > > <rajeshkumaria2000@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Yes I think you are right Sir, The strength of sign

determines

> > the

> > > > strength of its controllong lord for any particular house

> i.e.,

> > > ALso

> > > > the Lords of various signs become malefic/benfic depending

> upon

> > > the

> > > > Lagna, Kendras, Upachayas and Apokilimas signs i.e., Natural

> > > Benfics

> > > > become Functional malefic if they occupy kendras and vice-

> versa

> > > > etc., So Signs and houses are critically related as per basic

> of

> > > > this science(any good author's book can give all these

> > > > combinations)...Planet's own signs, exaltation sign,

> debilitation

> > > > signs, mooltrikona signs etc., I think once the natal

planet's

> > > > strength based on its sign lordship and house positioning is

> > > > determined, then one can go into dasa systems and apply

> various

> > > > dasa system rules...from that point onwards the house

> placements

> > > > with respect to Lagna and/or house placements with respect to

> > > > MahaDasa Lordships becomes critical for prediction points of

> view

> > > > (which Is what I am still learning)...no wonder people get

> > > confused

> > > > whether sign is important or house is important? Infact the

> > actual

> > > > thing is that natal planet's strength and poistioning is

> closely

> > > > related to both its actual sign placement and house

> placment....

> > (I

> > > > could go on but I thnk I should stop here since the rest is

> open

> > > to

> > > > actual prediction, investigations, expereiences and books

> only).

> > > >

> > > > , "sagar.astro"

> > > > <sagar.astro@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > , "iam_1972"

> <iam_1972@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Learned astrologers: please comment on whether the House

> is

> > > > more

> > > > > > important or whether the Sign is more important? Thank

> you

> > > > kindly.

> > > > > >

> > > > > evry house has its own departments and sphares represented

> by

> > it

> > > > they

> > > > > always remain same irrespective of the sighn that house

> falls

> > in

> > > > it

> > > > > will represent only those matteres only assiened to it, but

> > > > according

> > > > > to the sighn those matters either improve or become weak,if

> the

> > > > sighn

> > > > > is weaker or strong, because every sighn itself belongs to

a

> > > > > particular house of KAAL PURSHA .

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>