Question to Sreenadhji: On Divisional Charts

[Guest guest]

Sreenadhji,

 

What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for query, and

then look at house.

There are so many divisional charts.

 

Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or from

the divisional charts?

 

Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's books,

he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at the query

 

Pls. advise

Thanks

Kiran

[Guest guest]

Dear Kiran ji,

As per ancient indian astrology there is nothing called 'divisional

charts' - no ancient classics supports it. Actually what is there is

'divisions' (Amsas) of the sign. Plotting it a chart separately and

treating it separately (independent of) Natal chart is NOT AT ALL

advised or supported by the sages. Know it as a clear beginning point.

Both Raman and PVR are wrong in this regard. There methods might be

useful, but certainly 'divisional charts' and thus such methods are

NOT supported by or adviced by the sages (as we know it through the

ancient astrology classics).

Divisions based result derivation uses 2 schemes.

* Dwadasa varga scheme (This later get extended to include many

other multiples as well)

* Shadvargadhipa scheme (This too later get extended to include many

other vargadhipas)

We will deal with both these schemes and their use and underlying

rules when we reach the discussion on Divisions.

Currently as far as I am concerned - the group is still in Planet

base prediction, and there to in trying to understand in 2-planet

combinations. Be with the flow and gradually you will learn and

understand.

Note: Unlike other groups and scholars - this group starts from the

basics; trying to understand the view of sages in their own

perspective; and trying to reconstruct the original in its original

perspective.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " kiran.rama "

<kiran.rama wrote:

>

> Sreenadhji,

>

> What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

> They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for query, and

> then look at house.

> There are so many divisional charts.

>

> Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or from

> the divisional charts?

>

> Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's books,

> he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

> In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at the

query

>

> Pls. advise

> Thanks

> Kiran

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Goal ji,

You are utterly wrong - because -

* I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic; and as you

may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today is Non-vedic.

* Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as vedic/non-vedic

etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to Rishis -

that usually does not confirm that those texts were 'actually' written

by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which deals with

KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do you think

that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century?

* BPHS is just a compilation - you are right.

But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always - trying to

project me as some one who is trying to support of the vedas?!! Know

that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in support of

the Siderial Nonvedic astrology.

The single and simple questions are -

1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in support of

all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as -

* Use of Divisional charts

* Considering Transit in D-Charts

* Considering aspects in D-charts and so on?

2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see how much

and what you can predict about the native based on the same.

(Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select your D-number

as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth Date/Time

details won't be given]

Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the ancient indian

astrology through the words of ancient sages itself - quoting them is

a must. Quoting the modern learners like - Rath, PVR, BV Raman, KN

Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself - that is the way

we chose.

Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one thing, and

arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite another. In

the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with relevant

quotes and practical use.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, Gopal Goel

<gkgoel1937 wrote:

>

> Dear Mr. Kiran,

> I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views. Probably his

reply is based on following to surmises:

> 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such their

teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not refer Vargas

charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as authentic.

> 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION

> In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12 signs were not

in use. Should we discard their use. The answer is certainly not.

> Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

astrology.

> Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind review of

our astrological friends.

> Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool.

> Regards,

>

>

> G.K.GOEL

> Ph: 09350311433

> Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> NEW DELHI-110 076

> INDIA

>

>

>

>

> kiran.rama <kiran.rama

>

> Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM

> Question to Sreenadhji: On

Divisional Charts

>

> Sreenadhji,

>

> What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

> They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for query, and

> then look at house.

> There are so many divisional charts.

>

> Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or from

> the divisional charts?

>

> Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's books,

> he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

> In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at the

query

>

> Pls. advise

> Thanks

> Kiran

>

>

>

>

>

> Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know

how, go to

http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Mr. Goel,

 

>>...I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

charts, I most humbly beg to differ from his views...<<

 

You have every right to have your own opinion about this. However, Mr.

Sreenadh actually presented a strong argument when pointing out that

no classical textbook suggest the use of divisional charts. Actually

Mr. Sreenadh is absolutely right about this.

 

You cannot find even a single sloka in support of Divisional charts in

any classical textbook. This is because the use of Divisional charts

is a modern invention, that came the limelight somewhere around the

70-ties.

 

In spite of this, we have seen scholars like Sanjay Rath and Narasimha

Rao strongly promoting divisional Charts as being genuine Vedic

astrology. It is only natural if this has given rise to a certain

degree of confusion among beginners etc. Especially when BPHS is being

wrongly claimed as the authority of this.

 

>>...Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

astrology...<<

 

Maybe so, but I have seen some of the younger generation astrologers

discussing say a D-20 chart or D-60 chart without giving the slightest

importance to whether or not the Ascendant was correct. They just took

it for granted that off course the Ascendant was 100% correct. In my

opinion this is completely insane.

 

I have 30 years of experience in Hindu astrology, and I feel lucky

being able just to verify if the Ascendant sign alone is correct or

not. In some cases I am not even sure about the Ascendant sign, and

then I have to rely on the Moon-sign etc. I mean, how can two young

guys like that be sitting there discussing charts based on the 1/20-

part or 1/60-part of an Ascending sign? Do they even know what they

are talking about?

 

>>...I shall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind review

of our astrological friends...<<

 

There are a number of methods, available in the classics and the

nadis, of using the Vargas without turning them into divisional

charts. Vargottama is most certainly one such method. I will look

forward to read your article.

 

Very friendly,

Finn Wandahl

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Wandahl

 

It is indeed a valauable opinion from an experienced astrologer like

you.

Those who feel ,such usages as worthy may do so.During debates one

can constructively present arguments.

 

Respected shri Goel ,i feel as i have mentioned many times in the

past,there is a confusion between Vargas and Varga

chakras.Vargottama etc is very important.I am preparing a paper and

hence i am not going into another debate.

 

The division of a Rashi chakra into 12 and further division of

individual Rashis (not Rashi chakra) do have an inherent meaning.12

number is 12 bhavas as they represent the span-position-duration of

sun.As 12 months in an year.

 

Every month has Sundays ruled by Sun but Month is a Month and days

are days.Each has its own purpose.Similarly Rashis and its divisions

have different purposes.Rashi alone is a Bhava and planets can have

amsha in that rashi which is actign as a Bhava.

Sun is sitting at one place ,but he can infleunce through his rays

different areas through different tattwas.Navamsha is mentioned as

Nava Pranas.Your hand is one but diffrent elements from other part

of the body can run into your hand.So is prana trough nadis.Jyotish

is no different.It is Holistic as any other science like Ayurveda

etc.Link it with Ayurveda and it is more easier.You cannot have two

heads or ,two mouths.But you can have multiple amsha influences

(coming through nadis) on to your mouth.Thus one planet responsible

for a particular tattwa can inlfuence numerous places in your

body.But you are noth many.You are just one.

 

So is Rashi chakra.Pindanda -Brahmanda.One body multiple

influences.This has been the only demonstration on amshas as shown

in classics.

 

The new scholars might have a reason ,which they only know.Let them

seek Truth and they are respected too.But classics are pointing in a

diff direction.

 

Now i have to say that blind praise has left to a bad situation.When

we talk of Jyotish we start from its root.When we talk of Ashwamedha

we should start from the essential meaning and purpose of it.In

between many interpretations comes and goes.

 

These are my views and kindly think over.If we do not know how to

use Vimshamsha we can wait.We need not hurry to create our own

styles.

 

Regds

Pradeep

 

 

 

 

 

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Mr. Goel,

>

> >>...I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> charts, I most humbly beg to differ from his views...<<

>

> You have every right to have your own opinion about this. However,

Mr.

> Sreenadh actually presented a strong argument when pointing out

that

> no classical textbook suggest the use of divisional charts.

Actually

> Mr. Sreenadh is absolutely right about this.

>

> You cannot find even a single sloka in support of Divisional

charts in

> any classical textbook. This is because the use of Divisional

charts

> is a modern invention, that came the limelight somewhere around the

> 70-ties.

>

> In spite of this, we have seen scholars like Sanjay Rath and

Narasimha

> Rao strongly promoting divisional Charts as being genuine Vedic

> astrology. It is only natural if this has given rise to a certain

> degree of confusion among beginners etc. Especially when BPHS is

being

> wrongly claimed as the authority of this.

>

> >>...Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> astrology...<<

>

> Maybe so, but I have seen some of the younger generation

astrologers

> discussing say a D-20 chart or D-60 chart without giving the

slightest

> importance to whether or not the Ascendant was correct. They just

took

> it for granted that off course the Ascendant was 100% correct. In

my

> opinion this is completely insane.

>

> I have 30 years of experience in Hindu astrology, and I feel lucky

> being able just to verify if the Ascendant sign alone is correct or

> not. In some cases I am not even sure about the Ascendant sign, and

> then I have to rely on the Moon-sign etc. I mean, how can two young

> guys like that be sitting there discussing charts based on the

1/20-

> part or 1/60-part of an Ascending sign? Do they even know what they

> are talking about?

>

> >>...I shall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind

review

> of our astrological friends...<<

>

> There are a number of methods, available in the classics and the

> nadis, of using the Vargas without turning them into divisional

> charts. Vargottama is most certainly one such method. I will look

> forward to read your article.

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Goal ji,

The clear quote given by Parasara himself about the seasons and

Ayana in Parasara Samhita, (quoted by Bhattolpala and Ballalasena)

clearly shows that the text could be of BC 1400 (not taking the

language issues into account - which may bring the text to ADs). Refer

the achieve to see the detailed discussion and arguments between me

and Kaul ji on this.

Clearly BPHS is a compilation - because no two versions agree. By

the way how many versions of BPHS have you seen? I have seen at

least four - and all of them differ in almost every element. To say

the same thing, usually I can provide 2-3 sets of slokas, because the

same or similar things are quoted in different versions in different

ways. Just check the following document -

Sreenadh/Lagna%20lo\

rd%20in%20Various%20Houses.pdf

- there I have given at least 2 sets of slokas of Parasara from

various verions of BPHS - and you will see it as a fact. A Parasara

cannot be a double or triple Parasara - right? So BPHS is clearly a

compilation; and currently it have even become 'Jha BPHS' and

'Santanum BPHS'.

==>

> KPTY SYSTEM OF NUMBERING IS AS OLD AS SANSKRIT LANGUAGE. IT WAS NOT

INVENTED IN 4TH CENTURY A.D. FOR SURE.

<==

For argument sake I will agree - if you can quote any reference to

KTPY system in any book prior to 4th century AD. Can you quote from

any text (other than Jaimini sutra) written before 4th century, where

KTPY system is used or mentioned? I am waiting for your response.

==>

> Vargas charts are never considered in isolation or alone.

<==

But your gurus such as Rath and PVR seems to disagree on this - and

treats them in isolation - what do you have to say on this. Is it that

you disagree with them?

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, Gopal Goel

<gkgoel1937 wrote:

>

> Dear Sreenadh,

> I have never said that Bphs is a compilation. This is a original

work of sage Parasara , which had come in existence at least 4000

years before from now.

> No doubt , sage must have included astrological knowledge available

in his era. There are bound to be some additions and deletions when a

monumental work of such a merit is in existence over such a long

period. However 90% of core dictum's are still in-tact.

> KPTY SYSTEM OF NUMBERING IS AS OLD AS SANSKRIT LANGUAGE. IT WAS NOT

INVENTED IN 4TH CENTURY A.D. FOR SURE.

> Vargas charts are never considered in isolation or alone. They are

the parts of main birth chart and always ,I repeat, always along with

main and other Varga charts.

> Regards

>

>

> G.K.GOEL

> Ph: 09350311433

> Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> NEW DELHI-110 076

> INDIA

>

>

>

>

> Sreenadh <sreesog

>

> Thursday, 8 November, 2007 2:09:46 PM

> Re: Question to Sreenadhji: On

Divisional Charts

>

> Dear Goal ji,

> You are utterly wrong - because -

> * I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic; and as you

> may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today is Non-vedic.

> * Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as vedic/non-vedic

> etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to Rishis -

> that usually does not confirm that those texts were 'actually' written

> by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which deals with

> KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do you think

> that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century?

> * BPHS is just a compilation - you are right.

> But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always - trying to

> project me as some one who is trying to support of the vedas?!! Know

> that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in support of

> the Siderial Nonvedic astrology.

> The single and simple questions are -

> 1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in support of

> all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as -

> * Use of Divisional charts

> * Considering Transit in D-Charts

> * Considering aspects in D-charts and so on?

> 2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see how much

> and what you can predict about the native based on the same.

> (Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select your D-number

> as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth Date/Time

> details won't be given]

> Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the ancient indian

> astrology through the words of ancient sages itself - quoting them is

> a must. Quoting the modern learners like - Rath, PVR, BV Raman, KN

> Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself - that is the way

> we chose.

> Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one thing, and

> arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite another. In

> the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with relevant

> quotes and practical use.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology, Gopal Goel

> <gkgoel1937@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr. Kiran,

> > I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views. Probably his

> reply is based on following to surmises:

> > 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such their

> teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not refer Vargas

> charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as authentic.

> > 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION

> > In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12 signs were not

> in use. Should we discard their use.. The answer is certainly not.

> > Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> astrology.

> > Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind review of

> our astrological friends.

> > Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool.

> > Regards,

> >

> >

> > G.K.GOEL

> > Ph: 09350311433

> > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > INDIA

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > kiran.rama <kiran.rama@ ...>

> > ancient_indian_ astrology

> > Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM

> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Question to Sreenadhji: On

> Divisional Charts

> >

> > Sreenadhji,

> >

> > What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

> > They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for query, and

> > then look at house.

> > There are so many divisional charts.

> >

> > Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or from

> > the divisional charts?

> >

> > Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's books,

> > he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

> > In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at the

> query

> >

> > Pls. advise

> > Thanks

> > Kiran

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know

> how, go to

> http://help. / l/in// mail/mail/ tools/tools- 08.html

> Explore your hobbies and interests. Go to

http://in.promos./groups

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Finn ji,

Beautifully said! I agree with every statement made in the post to

full 100%. I would love to write pages in support of the arguments

you put forward - but that we will postpone to another time. Those

points you mentioned and clarified – exactly those were the issues I

was pointing to – and completely agree with you on this.

Love and Hugs,

Sreenadh

 

, " Finn Wandahl "

<finn.wandahl wrote:

>

> Dear Mr. Goel,

>

> >>...I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> charts, I most humbly beg to differ from his views...<<

>

> You have every right to have your own opinion about this. However, Mr.

> Sreenadh actually presented a strong argument when pointing out that

> no classical textbook suggest the use of divisional charts. Actually

> Mr. Sreenadh is absolutely right about this.

>

> You cannot find even a single sloka in support of Divisional charts in

> any classical textbook. This is because the use of Divisional charts

> is a modern invention, that came the limelight somewhere around the

> 70-ties.

>

> In spite of this, we have seen scholars like Sanjay Rath and Narasimha

> Rao strongly promoting divisional Charts as being genuine Vedic

> astrology. It is only natural if this has given rise to a certain

> degree of confusion among beginners etc. Especially when BPHS is being

> wrongly claimed as the authority of this.

>

> >>...Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> astrology...<<

>

> Maybe so, but I have seen some of the younger generation astrologers

> discussing say a D-20 chart or D-60 chart without giving the slightest

> importance to whether or not the Ascendant was correct. They just took

> it for granted that off course the Ascendant was 100% correct. In my

> opinion this is completely insane.

>

> I have 30 years of experience in Hindu astrology, and I feel lucky

> being able just to verify if the Ascendant sign alone is correct or

> not. In some cases I am not even sure about the Ascendant sign, and

> then I have to rely on the Moon-sign etc. I mean, how can two young

> guys like that be sitting there discussing charts based on the 1/20-

> part or 1/60-part of an Ascending sign? Do they even know what they

> are talking about?

>

> >>...I shall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind review

> of our astrological friends...<<

>

> There are a number of methods, available in the classics and the

> nadis, of using the Vargas without turning them into divisional

> charts. Vargottama is most certainly one such method. I will look

> forward to read your article.

>

> Very friendly,

> Finn Wandahl

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Pradeep and Sreenadh,

 

Thank you very much to both of you :-)

 

 

Finn

 

 

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Shri Wandahl

>

> It is indeed a valauable opinion from an experienced astrologer like

> you.

> Those who feel ,such usages as worthy may do so.During debates one

> can constructively present arguments.

>

> Respected shri Goel ,i feel as i have mentioned many times in the

> past,there is a confusion between Vargas and Varga

> chakras.Vargottama etc is very important.I am preparing a paper and

> hence i am not going into another debate.

>

> The division of a Rashi chakra into 12 and further division of

> individual Rashis (not Rashi chakra) do have an inherent meaning.12

> number is 12 bhavas as they represent the span-position-duration of

> sun.As 12 months in an year.

>

> Every month has Sundays ruled by Sun but Month is a Month and days

> are days.Each has its own purpose.Similarly Rashis and its divisions

> have different purposes.Rashi alone is a Bhava and planets can have

> amsha in that rashi which is actign as a Bhava.

> Sun is sitting at one place ,but he can infleunce through his rays

> different areas through different tattwas.Navamsha is mentioned as

> Nava Pranas.Your hand is one but diffrent elements from other part

> of the body can run into your hand.So is prana trough nadis.Jyotish

> is no different.It is Holistic as any other science like Ayurveda

> etc.Link it with Ayurveda and it is more easier.You cannot have two

> heads or ,two mouths.But you can have multiple amsha influences

> (coming through nadis) on to your mouth.Thus one planet responsible

> for a particular tattwa can inlfuence numerous places in your

> body.But you are noth many.You are just one.

>

> So is Rashi chakra.Pindanda -Brahmanda.One body multiple

> influences.This has been the only demonstration on amshas as shown

> in classics.

>

> The new scholars might have a reason ,which they only know.Let them

> seek Truth and they are respected too.But classics are pointing in a

> diff direction.

>

> Now i have to say that blind praise has left to a bad situation.When

> we talk of Jyotish we start from its root.When we talk of Ashwamedha

> we should start from the essential meaning and purpose of it.In

> between many interpretations comes and goes.

>

> These are my views and kindly think over.If we do not know how to

> use Vimshamsha we can wait.We need not hurry to create our own

> styles.

>

> Regds

> Pradeep

>

>

>

>

>

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr. Goel,

> >

> > >>...I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> > charts, I most humbly beg to differ from his views...<<

> >

> > You have every right to have your own opinion about this. However,

> Mr.

> > Sreenadh actually presented a strong argument when pointing out

> that

> > no classical textbook suggest the use of divisional charts.

> Actually

> > Mr. Sreenadh is absolutely right about this.

> >

> > You cannot find even a single sloka in support of Divisional

> charts in

> > any classical textbook. This is because the use of Divisional

> charts

> > is a modern invention, that came the limelight somewhere around the

> > 70-ties.

> >

> > In spite of this, we have seen scholars like Sanjay Rath and

> Narasimha

> > Rao strongly promoting divisional Charts as being genuine Vedic

> > astrology. It is only natural if this has given rise to a certain

> > degree of confusion among beginners etc. Especially when BPHS is

> being

> > wrongly claimed as the authority of this.

> >

> > >>...Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> > astrology...<<

> >

> > Maybe so, but I have seen some of the younger generation

> astrologers

> > discussing say a D-20 chart or D-60 chart without giving the

> slightest

> > importance to whether or not the Ascendant was correct. They just

> took

> > it for granted that off course the Ascendant was 100% correct. In

> my

> > opinion this is completely insane.

> >

> > I have 30 years of experience in Hindu astrology, and I feel lucky

> > being able just to verify if the Ascendant sign alone is correct or

> > not. In some cases I am not even sure about the Ascendant sign, and

> > then I have to rely on the Moon-sign etc. I mean, how can two young

> > guys like that be sitting there discussing charts based on the

> 1/20-

> > part or 1/60-part of an Ascending sign? Do they even know what they

> > are talking about?

> >

> > >>...I shall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind

> review

> > of our astrological friends...<<

> >

> > There are a number of methods, available in the classics and the

> > nadis, of using the Vargas without turning them into divisional

> > charts. Vargottama is most certainly one such method. I will look

> > forward to read your article.

> >

> > Very friendly,

> > Finn Wandahl

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Padeep ji,

Thanks for the well written mail - yah, it sparks some where - the

ideas and intuitions.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " vijayadas_pradeep "

<vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Shri Wandahl

>

> It is indeed a valauable opinion from an experienced astrologer like

> you.

> Those who feel ,such usages as worthy may do so.During debates one

> can constructively present arguments.

>

> Respected shri Goel ,i feel as i have mentioned many times in the

> past,there is a confusion between Vargas and Varga

> chakras.Vargottama etc is very important.I am preparing a paper and

> hence i am not going into another debate.

>

> The division of a Rashi chakra into 12 and further division of

> individual Rashis (not Rashi chakra) do have an inherent meaning.12

> number is 12 bhavas as they represent the span-position-duration of

> sun.As 12 months in an year.

>

> Every month has Sundays ruled by Sun but Month is a Month and days

> are days.Each has its own purpose.Similarly Rashis and its divisions

> have different purposes.Rashi alone is a Bhava and planets can have

> amsha in that rashi which is actign as a Bhava.

> Sun is sitting at one place ,but he can infleunce through his rays

> different areas through different tattwas.Navamsha is mentioned as

> Nava Pranas.Your hand is one but diffrent elements from other part

> of the body can run into your hand.So is prana trough nadis.Jyotish

> is no different.It is Holistic as any other science like Ayurveda

> etc.Link it with Ayurveda and it is more easier.You cannot have two

> heads or ,two mouths.But you can have multiple amsha influences

> (coming through nadis) on to your mouth.Thus one planet responsible

> for a particular tattwa can inlfuence numerous places in your

> body.But you are noth many.You are just one.

>

> So is Rashi chakra.Pindanda -Brahmanda.One body multiple

> influences.This has been the only demonstration on amshas as shown

> in classics.

>

> The new scholars might have a reason ,which they only know.Let them

> seek Truth and they are respected too.But classics are pointing in a

> diff direction.

>

> Now i have to say that blind praise has left to a bad situation.When

> we talk of Jyotish we start from its root.When we talk of Ashwamedha

> we should start from the essential meaning and purpose of it.In

> between many interpretations comes and goes.

>

> These are my views and kindly think over.If we do not know how to

> use Vimshamsha we can wait.We need not hurry to create our own

> styles.

>

> Regds

> Pradeep

 

> , " Finn Wandahl "

> <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr. Goel,

> >

> > >>...I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> > charts, I most humbly beg to differ from his views...<<

> >

> > You have every right to have your own opinion about this. However,

> Mr.

> > Sreenadh actually presented a strong argument when pointing out

> that

> > no classical textbook suggest the use of divisional charts.

> Actually

> > Mr. Sreenadh is absolutely right about this.

> >

> > You cannot find even a single sloka in support of Divisional

> charts in

> > any classical textbook. This is because the use of Divisional

> charts

> > is a modern invention, that came the limelight somewhere around the

> > 70-ties.

> >

> > In spite of this, we have seen scholars like Sanjay Rath and

> Narasimha

> > Rao strongly promoting divisional Charts as being genuine Vedic

> > astrology. It is only natural if this has given rise to a certain

> > degree of confusion among beginners etc. Especially when BPHS is

> being

> > wrongly claimed as the authority of this.

> >

> > >>...Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> > astrology...<<

> >

> > Maybe so, but I have seen some of the younger generation

> astrologers

> > discussing say a D-20 chart or D-60 chart without giving the

> slightest

> > importance to whether or not the Ascendant was correct. They just

> took

> > it for granted that off course the Ascendant was 100% correct. In

> my

> > opinion this is completely insane.

> >

> > I have 30 years of experience in Hindu astrology, and I feel lucky

> > being able just to verify if the Ascendant sign alone is correct or

> > not. In some cases I am not even sure about the Ascendant sign, and

> > then I have to rely on the Moon-sign etc. I mean, how can two young

> > guys like that be sitting there discussing charts based on the

> 1/20-

> > part or 1/60-part of an Ascending sign? Do they even know what they

> > are talking about?

> >

> > >>...I shall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind

> review

> > of our astrological friends...<<

> >

> > There are a number of methods, available in the classics and the

> > nadis, of using the Vargas without turning them into divisional

> > charts. Vargottama is most certainly one such method. I will look

> > forward to read your article.

> >

> > Very friendly,

> > Finn Wandahl

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear shri Sreenadh

 

It is your familiarity with classical shlokas and confirmations that

raise my confidence.Thank you.

 

Pradeep

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Padeep ji,

> Thanks for the well written mail - yah, it sparks some where - the

> ideas and intuitions.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Shri Wandahl

> >

> > It is indeed a valauable opinion from an experienced astrologer like

> > you.

> > Those who feel ,such usages as worthy may do so.During debates one

> > can constructively present arguments.

> >

> > Respected shri Goel ,i feel as i have mentioned many times in the

> > past,there is a confusion between Vargas and Varga

> > chakras.Vargottama etc is very important.I am preparing a paper and

> > hence i am not going into another debate.

> >

> > The division of a Rashi chakra into 12 and further division of

> > individual Rashis (not Rashi chakra) do have an inherent meaning.12

> > number is 12 bhavas as they represent the span-position-duration of

> > sun.As 12 months in an year.

> >

> > Every month has Sundays ruled by Sun but Month is a Month and days

> > are days.Each has its own purpose.Similarly Rashis and its divisions

> > have different purposes.Rashi alone is a Bhava and planets can have

> > amsha in that rashi which is actign as a Bhava.

> > Sun is sitting at one place ,but he can infleunce through his rays

> > different areas through different tattwas.Navamsha is mentioned as

> > Nava Pranas.Your hand is one but diffrent elements from other part

> > of the body can run into your hand.So is prana trough nadis.Jyotish

> > is no different.It is Holistic as any other science like Ayurveda

> > etc.Link it with Ayurveda and it is more easier.You cannot have two

> > heads or ,two mouths.But you can have multiple amsha influences

> > (coming through nadis) on to your mouth.Thus one planet responsible

> > for a particular tattwa can inlfuence numerous places in your

> > body.But you are noth many.You are just one.

> >

> > So is Rashi chakra.Pindanda -Brahmanda.One body multiple

> > influences.This has been the only demonstration on amshas as shown

> > in classics.

> >

> > The new scholars might have a reason ,which they only know.Let them

> > seek Truth and they are respected too.But classics are pointing in a

> > diff direction.

> >

> > Now i have to say that blind praise has left to a bad situation.When

> > we talk of Jyotish we start from its root.When we talk of Ashwamedha

> > we should start from the essential meaning and purpose of it.In

> > between many interpretations comes and goes.

> >

> > These are my views and kindly think over.If we do not know how to

> > use Vimshamsha we can wait.We need not hurry to create our own

> > styles.

> >

> > Regds

> > Pradeep

>

> > , " Finn Wandahl "

> > <finn.wandahl@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr. Goel,

> > >

> > > >>...I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> > > charts, I most humbly beg to differ from his views...<<

> > >

> > > You have every right to have your own opinion about this. However,

> > Mr.

> > > Sreenadh actually presented a strong argument when pointing out

> > that

> > > no classical textbook suggest the use of divisional charts.

> > Actually

> > > Mr. Sreenadh is absolutely right about this.

> > >

> > > You cannot find even a single sloka in support of Divisional

> > charts in

> > > any classical textbook. This is because the use of Divisional

> > charts

> > > is a modern invention, that came the limelight somewhere around the

> > > 70-ties.

> > >

> > > In spite of this, we have seen scholars like Sanjay Rath and

> > Narasimha

> > > Rao strongly promoting divisional Charts as being genuine Vedic

> > > astrology. It is only natural if this has given rise to a certain

> > > degree of confusion among beginners etc. Especially when BPHS is

> > being

> > > wrongly claimed as the authority of this.

> > >

> > > >>...Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> > > astrology...<<

> > >

> > > Maybe so, but I have seen some of the younger generation

> > astrologers

> > > discussing say a D-20 chart or D-60 chart without giving the

> > slightest

> > > importance to whether or not the Ascendant was correct. They just

> > took

> > > it for granted that off course the Ascendant was 100% correct. In

> > my

> > > opinion this is completely insane.

> > >

> > > I have 30 years of experience in Hindu astrology, and I feel lucky

> > > being able just to verify if the Ascendant sign alone is correct or

> > > not. In some cases I am not even sure about the Ascendant sign, and

> > > then I have to rely on the Moon-sign etc. I mean, how can two young

> > > guys like that be sitting there discussing charts based on the

> > 1/20-

> > > part or 1/60-part of an Ascending sign? Do they even know what they

> > > are talking about?

> > >

> > > >>...I shall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind

> > review

> > > of our astrological friends...<<

> > >

> > > There are a number of methods, available in the classics and the

> > > nadis, of using the Vargas without turning them into divisional

> > > charts. Vargottama is most certainly one such method. I will look

> > > forward to read your article.

> > >

> > > Very friendly,

> > > Finn Wandahl

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Respected Sreenadhji,

 

I am a great fan of your posts - especially the posts on lagna lord in

various houses and others that gives any person a scientific way of

analyzing different house lords in different houses.

 

There is a contrarian argument to the importance of divisional charts

- (quoted by PVRji)

" That astrological doctrine should not fail the twin test. Twins born

within 2 minutes of each other should have different futures that can

be predicted by way of astrology. Going by natal chart only, people

born in same duration should have the same futures. So we should look

at divisional charts and lagnas like Ghati Lagna which changes by 1.25

degree for 1 minute change in birth time, Hora Lagna that changes at

the rate of one rasi per hour, etc "

 

Regards

Kiran

 

 

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Goal ji,

> You are utterly wrong - because -

> * I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic; and as you

> may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today is Non-vedic.

> * Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as vedic/non-vedic

> etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to Rishis -

> that usually does not confirm that those texts were 'actually' written

> by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which deals with

> KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do you think

> that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century?

> * BPHS is just a compilation - you are right.

> But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always - trying to

> project me as some one who is trying to support of the vedas?!! Know

> that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in support of

> the Siderial Nonvedic astrology.

> The single and simple questions are -

> 1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in support of

> all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as -

> * Use of Divisional charts

> * Considering Transit in D-Charts

> * Considering aspects in D-charts and so on?

> 2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see how much

> and what you can predict about the native based on the same.

> (Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select your D-number

> as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth Date/Time

> details won't be given]

> Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the ancient indian

> astrology through the words of ancient sages itself - quoting them is

> a must. Quoting the modern learners like - Rath, PVR, BV Raman, KN

> Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself - that is the way

> we chose.

> Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one thing, and

> arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite another. In

> the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with relevant

> quotes and practical use.

> Love,

> Sreenadh

>

> , Gopal Goel

> <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Mr. Kiran,

> > I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views. Probably his

> reply is based on following to surmises:

> > 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such their

> teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not refer Vargas

> charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as authentic.

> > 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION

> > In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12 signs were not

> in use. Should we discard their use. The answer is certainly not.

> > Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> astrology.

> > Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind review of

> our astrological friends.

> > Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool.

> > Regards,

> >

> >

> > G.K.GOEL

> > Ph: 09350311433

> > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > INDIA

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > kiran.rama <kiran.rama@>

> >

> > Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM

> > Question to Sreenadhji: On

> Divisional Charts

> >

> > Sreenadhji,

> >

> > What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

> > They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for query, and

> > then look at house.

> > There are so many divisional charts.

> >

> > Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or from

> > the divisional charts?

> >

> > Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's books,

> > he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

> > In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at the

> query

> >

> > Pls. advise

> > Thanks

> > Kiran

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know

> how, go to

> http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Kiran ji,

I don't agree to PVR's words - he is just echoing the SJC beliefs

and teachings. Hundreds of SJC beliefs are their which does not have

a scriptural or logical base at all! So such references does not

apply in our discussions. PVR is not an ancient scriptural reference

but only a simple modern day learner, just like all of us, and no

authority. [PVR is appreciated by me, NOT for his astrological

knowledge, not for the astrological beliefs he has, not the

theorizing he does. But instead I appreciate and respect him for his

unselfish attitude in creating such a good software like Jhora 7.0

and distributing it to the world for free]

The answer to twins problem is not in the Divisional charts but in

divisions (amsas) - because that is the thing dealt within ancient

scripts. Ref to the Kauta Rectification method section in the pdf:

Sreenadh/

Birth%20Rectification%20(Complete).pdf

- and that may help us to get some more light into this issue

regarding twins.

Further twins is not the ultimate, or urgent problem that needs

sudden solution. There more important, primary problems like 'How to

predict with the Natal chart?' it self - which even the so-called

knowledgeable who at times speaks about D-60, D-81, D-150 and what

not - also seems to miss!! Most of them don't know even how to

predict with D1 itself, and then what to say about D-60 or 150!!

So if you sincerely want to learn astrology, my advice to you is,

forget all the D-charts as of now, and start with the Basic natal

chart. If your are sure that you can give at least a 100 trustworthy

statement that reflect truth based on the Natal chart itself - then

proceed to learn the other divisions. Otherwise the result would be

that you will go on learning for decades (like many you may find in

this group as well), but when presented with a simple natal chart,

they won't be knowing what to say!! No, not even a trustworthy

description of 10 lines will come from them! Do you want to waste

time in that way? I think you won't. That is why the advice, start

from the basics, and go by the scriptures - always match the logical

derived results with real life experience. If real life experience

does not match with the reference, drop that reference and collect

and support the references - that really helps you to arrive at

correct results in no time - means, the trustworthy references that

helps you to " predict " . Astrology is a practical subject for

PREDICION.

Note: It is we who choose our path, and our selection creates our

destiny.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " kiran.rama "

<kiran.rama wrote:

>

> Respected Sreenadhji,

>

> I am a great fan of your posts - especially the posts on lagna lord

in

> various houses and others that gives any person a scientific way of

> analyzing different house lords in different houses.

>

> There is a contrarian argument to the importance of divisional

charts

> - (quoted by PVRji)

> " That astrological doctrine should not fail the twin test. Twins

born

> within 2 minutes of each other should have different futures that

can

> be predicted by way of astrology. Going by natal chart only, people

> born in same duration should have the same futures. So we should

look

> at divisional charts and lagnas like Ghati Lagna which changes by

1.25

> degree for 1 minute change in birth time, Hora Lagna that changes at

> the rate of one rasi per hour, etc "

>

> Regards

> Kiran

>

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Goal ji,

> > You are utterly wrong - because -

> > * I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic; and

as you

> > may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today is Non-

vedic.

> > * Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as vedic/non-

vedic

> > etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to

Rishis -

> > that usually does not confirm that those texts were 'actually'

written

> > by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which deals

with

> > KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do you think

> > that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century?

> > * BPHS is just a compilation - you are right.

> > But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always - trying

to

> > project me as some one who is trying to support of the vedas?!!

Know

> > that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in

support of

> > the Siderial Nonvedic astrology.

> > The single and simple questions are -

> > 1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in support

of

> > all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as -

> > * Use of Divisional charts

> > * Considering Transit in D-Charts

> > * Considering aspects in D-charts and so on?

> > 2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see how

much

> > and what you can predict about the native based on the same.

> > (Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select your D-

number

> > as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth

Date/Time

> > details won't be given]

> > Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the ancient

indian

> > astrology through the words of ancient sages itself - quoting

them is

> > a must. Quoting the modern learners like - Rath, PVR, BV Raman, KN

> > Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself - that is

the way

> > we chose.

> > Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one thing,

and

> > arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite

another. In

> > the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with

relevant

> > quotes and practical use.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > , Gopal Goel

> > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Mr. Kiran,

> > > I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> > charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views. Probably his

> > reply is based on following to surmises:

> > > 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such their

> > teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not refer

Vargas

> > charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as authentic.

> > > 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION

> > > In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12 signs

were not

> > in use. Should we discard their use. The answer is certainly not.

> > > Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive

> > astrology.

> > > Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind

review of

> > our astrological friends.

> > > Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool.

> > > Regards,

> > >

> > >

> > > G.K.GOEL

> > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > INDIA

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > kiran.rama <kiran.rama@>

> > >

> > > Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM

> > > Question to Sreenadhji: On

> > Divisional Charts

> > >

> > > Sreenadhji,

> > >

> > > What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

> > > They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for

query, and

> > > then look at house.

> > > There are so many divisional charts.

> > >

> > > Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or

from

> > > the divisional charts?

> > >

> > > Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's

books,

> > > he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

> > > In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at

the

> > query

> > >

> > > Pls. advise

> > > Thanks

> > > Kiran

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know

> > how, go to

> > http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-

08.html

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sreenadh,

 

I agree fully. I am not getting time these days to participate. I beleive divisional charts is one of the biggest

myths created. It is unfortunate we get into argument about twins. I had discussion on the VA list a few years back on the same inwhich you also participated. If a couple of minutes of difference can alter the future so drastically in case of twins, then by same token most of our prediction should be incorrect as well. Can we say for sure that every natal chart we get ( of people who are not twins) is accurate to within 2 minutes? I think not.

 

 

It is just a convenient argument put forth by the school which had made careers out of divisional charts. They have written so many articles that now they can not even back out of it. Like Gobel once said a lie repeated 1 thousand times becomes the truth.

 

 

....

 

On 11/14/07, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Kiran ji,I don't agree to PVR's words - he is just echoing the SJC beliefs and teachings. Hundreds of SJC beliefs are their which does not have a scriptural or logical base at all! So such references does not apply in our discussions. PVR is not an ancient scriptural reference but only a simple modern day learner, just like all of us, and no authority. [PVR is appreciated by me, NOT for his astrological knowledge, not for the astrological beliefs he has, not the theorizing he does. But instead I appreciate and respect him for his unselfish attitude in creating such a good software like Jhora 7.0 and distributing it to the world for free]The answer to twins problem is not in the Divisional charts but in divisions (amsas) - because that is the thing dealt within ancient scripts. Ref to the Kauta Rectification method section in the pdf:

Sreenadh/Birth%20Rectification%20(Complete).pdf - and that may help us to get some more light into this issue regarding twins. Further twins is not the ultimate, or urgent problem that needs sudden solution. There more important, primary problems like 'How to predict with the Natal chart?' it self - which even the so-called knowledgeable who at times speaks about D-60, D-81, D-150 and what not - also seems to miss!! Most of them don't know even how to predict with D1 itself, and then what to say about D-60 or 150!! So if you sincerely want to learn astrology, my advice to you is, forget all the D-charts as of now, and start with the Basic natal chart. If your are sure that you can give at least a 100 trustworthy statement that reflect truth based on the Natal chart itself - then proceed to learn the other divisions. Otherwise the result would be

that you will go on learning for decades (like many you may find in this group as well), but when presented with a simple natal chart, they won't be knowing what to say!! No, not even a trustworthy description of 10 lines will come from them! Do you want to waste time in that way? I think you won't. That is why the advice, start from the basics, and go by the scriptures - always match the logical derived results with real life experience. If real life experience

does not match with the reference, drop that reference and collect and support the references - that really helps you to arrive at correct results in no time - means, the trustworthy references that helps you to " predict " . Astrology is a practical subject for PREDICION.Note: It is we who choose our path, and our selection creates our destiny. Love,Sreenadh

, " kiran.rama " <kiran.rama wrote:>

> Respected Sreenadhji,> > I am a great fan of your posts - especially the posts on lagna lord in> various houses and others that gives any person a scientific way of

> analyzing different house lords in different houses.> > There is a contrarian argument to the importance of divisional charts> - (quoted by PVRji)> " That astrological doctrine should not fail the twin test. Twins born> within 2 minutes of each other should have different futures that can> be predicted by way of astrology. Going by natal chart only, people> born in same duration should have the same futures. So we should look> at divisional charts and lagnas like Ghati Lagna which changes by 1.25> degree for 1 minute change in birth time, Hora Lagna that changes at> the rate of one rasi per hour, etc "

> > Regards> Kiran> > >

, " Sreenadh " > <sreesog@> wrote:> >> > Dear Goal ji,> > You are utterly wrong - because - > > * I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic; and as you> > may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today is Non-vedic.> > * Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as vedic/non-vedic> > etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to Rishis -> > that usually does not confirm that those texts were 'actually' written> > by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which deals with> > KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do you think

> > that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century? > > * BPHS is just a compilation - you are right. > > But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always - trying to> > project me as some one who is trying to support of the vedas?!! Know> > that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in support of> > the Siderial Nonvedic astrology.> > The single and simple questions are - > > 1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in support of> > all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as -> > * Use of Divisional charts> > * Considering Transit in D-Charts> > * Considering aspects in D-charts and so on?

> > 2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see how much> > and what you can predict about the native based on the same.> > (Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select your D-

number> > as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth Date/Time> > details won't be given]> > Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the ancient indian

> > astrology through the words of ancient sages itself - quoting them is> > a must. Quoting the modern learners like - Rath, PVR, BV Raman, KN> > Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself - that is the way> > we chose. > > Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one thing, and> > arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite another. In> > the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with relevant> > quotes and practical use.> > Love,> > Sreenadh > > > >

, Gopal Goel> > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Mr. Kiran,> > > I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional

> > charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views. Probably his> > reply is based on following to surmises:> > > 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such their> > teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not refer Vargas> > charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as authentic.> > > 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION> > > In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12 signs were not

> > in use. Should we discard their use. The answer is certainly not.> > > Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive> > astrology.> > > Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind review of> > our astrological friends. > > > Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool.> > > Regards,> > > > > > > > > G.K.GOEL> > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR> > > NEW DELHI-110 076> > > INDIA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kiran.rama <kiran.rama@>> > >

> > > Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM> > > Question to Sreenadhji: On> > Divisional Charts> > > > > > Sreenadhji,

> > > > > > What is your opinion on divisional charts method?> > > They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for query, and> > > then look at house.

> > > There are so many divisional charts.> > > > > > Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or from> > > the divisional charts?> > > > > > Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's books,> > > he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.> > > In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at the> > query> > > > > > Pls. advise> > > Thanks> > > Kiran > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know> > how, go to> >

http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-08.html> > >> >>

[Guest guest]

Dear Pandit ji,

Thanks for sharing the wise words - I agree to you fully.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, Panditji

<navagraha wrote:

>

> Namaste Sreenadh,

>

> I agree fully. I am not getting time these days to participate. I

beleive

> divisional charts is one of the biggest

> myths created. It is unfortunate we get into argument about twins.

I had

> discussion on the VA list a few years back on the same inwhich you

also

> participated. If a couple of minutes of difference can alter the

future so

> drastically in case of twins, then by same token most of our

prediction

> should be incorrect as well. Can we say for sure that every natal

chart we

> get ( of people who are not twins) is accurate to within 2 minutes?

I think

> not.

>

> It is just a convenient argument put forth by the school which had

made

> careers out of divisional charts. They have written so many

articles that

> now they can not even back out of it. Like Gobel once said a lie

repeated 1

> thousand times becomes the truth.

>

> ...

>

>

>

> On 11/14/07, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

> >

> > Dear Kiran ji,

> > I don't agree to PVR's words - he is just echoing the SJC beliefs

> > and teachings. Hundreds of SJC beliefs are their which does not

have

> > a scriptural or logical base at all! So such references does not

> > apply in our discussions. PVR is not an ancient scriptural

reference

> > but only a simple modern day learner, just like all of us, and no

> > authority. [PVR is appreciated by me, NOT for his astrological

> > knowledge, not for the astrological beliefs he has, not the

> > theorizing he does. But instead I appreciate and respect him for

his

> > unselfish attitude in creating such a good software like Jhora 7.0

> > and distributing it to the world for free]

> > The answer to twins problem is not in the Divisional charts but in

> > divisions (amsas) - because that is the thing dealt within ancient

> > scripts. Ref to the Kauta Rectification method section in the pdf:

> >

Sreenadh/

> > Birth%20Rectification%20(Complete).pdf

> > - and that may help us to get some more light into this issue

> > regarding twins.

> > Further twins is not the ultimate, or urgent problem that needs

> > sudden solution. There more important, primary problems like 'How

to

> > predict with the Natal chart?' it self - which even the so-called

> > knowledgeable who at times speaks about D-60, D-81, D-150 and what

> > not - also seems to miss!! Most of them don't know even how to

> > predict with D1 itself, and then what to say about D-60 or 150!!

> > So if you sincerely want to learn astrology, my advice to you is,

> > forget all the D-charts as of now, and start with the Basic natal

> > chart. If your are sure that you can give at least a 100

trustworthy

> > statement that reflect truth based on the Natal chart itself -

then

> > proceed to learn the other divisions. Otherwise the result would

be

> > that you will go on learning for decades (like many you may find

in

> > this group as well), but when presented with a simple natal chart,

> > they won't be knowing what to say!! No, not even a trustworthy

> > description of 10 lines will come from them! Do you want to waste

> > time in that way? I think you won't. That is why the advice, start

> > from the basics, and go by the scriptures - always match the

logical

> > derived results with real life experience. If real life experience

> > does not match with the reference, drop that reference and collect

> > and support the references - that really helps you to arrive at

> > correct results in no time - means, the trustworthy references

that

> > helps you to " predict " . Astrology is a practical subject for

> > PREDICION.

> > Note: It is we who choose our path, and our selection creates our

> > destiny.

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > --- In

<%

40>,

> > " kiran.rama "

> > <kiran.rama@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Respected Sreenadhji,

> > >

> > > I am a great fan of your posts - especially the posts on lagna

lord

> > in

> > > various houses and others that gives any person a scientific

way of

> > > analyzing different house lords in different houses.

> > >

> > > There is a contrarian argument to the importance of divisional

> > charts

> > > - (quoted by PVRji)

> > > " That astrological doctrine should not fail the twin test. Twins

> > born

> > > within 2 minutes of each other should have different futures

that

> > can

> > > be predicted by way of astrology. Going by natal chart only,

people

> > > born in same duration should have the same futures. So we should

> > look

> > > at divisional charts and lagnas like Ghati Lagna which changes

by

> > 1.25

> > > degree for 1 minute change in birth time, Hora Lagna that

changes at

> > > the rate of one rasi per hour, etc "

> > >

> > > Regards

> > > Kiran

> > >

> > >

> > > --- In

<%

40>,

> > " Sreenadh "

> > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Goal ji,

> > > > You are utterly wrong - because -

> > > > * I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic; and

> > as you

> > > > may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today is

Non-

> > vedic.

> > > > * Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as vedic/non-

> > vedic

> > > > etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to

> > Rishis -

> > > > that usually does not confirm that those texts were 'actually'

> > written

> > > > by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which

deals

> > with

> > > > KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do you

think

> > > > that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century?

> > > > * BPHS is just a compilation - you are right.

> > > > But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always - trying

> > to

> > > > project me as some one who is trying to support of the

vedas?!!

> > Know

> > > > that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in

> > support of

> > > > the Siderial Nonvedic astrology.

> > > > The single and simple questions are -

> > > > 1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in

support

> > of

> > > > all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as -

> > > > * Use of Divisional charts

> > > > * Considering Transit in D-Charts

> > > > * Considering aspects in D-charts and so on?

> > > > 2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see how

> > much

> > > > and what you can predict about the native based on the same.

> > > > (Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select your

D-

> > number

> > > > as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth

> > Date/Time

> > > > details won't be given]

> > > > Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the ancient

> > indian

> > > > astrology through the words of ancient sages itself - quoting

> > them is

> > > > a must. Quoting the modern learners like - Rath, PVR, BV

Raman, KN

> > > > Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself - that is

> > the way

> > > > we chose.

> > > > Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one thing,

> > and

> > > > arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite

> > another. In

> > > > the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with

> > relevant

> > > > quotes and practical use.

> > > > Love,

> > > > Sreenadh

> > > >

> > > > --- In

<%

40>,

> > Gopal Goel

> > > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Mr. Kiran,

> > > > > I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on

divisional

> > > > charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views. Probably

his

> > > > reply is based on following to surmises:

> > > > > 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such their

> > > > teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not

refer

> > Vargas

> > > > charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as

authentic.

> > > > > 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION

> > > > > In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12 signs

> > were not

> > > > in use. Should we discard their use. The answer is certainly

not.

> > > > > Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in

predictive

> > > > astrology.

> > > > > Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind

> > review of

> > > > our astrological friends.

> > > > > Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool.

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > > INDIA

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > kiran.rama <kiran.rama@>

> > > > > To:

<%

40>

> > > > > Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM

> > > > > Question to Sreenadhji:

On

> > > > Divisional Charts

> > > > >

> > > > > Sreenadhji,

> > > > >

> > > > > What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

> > > > > They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for

> > query, and

> > > > > then look at house.

> > > > > There are so many divisional charts.

> > > > >

> > > > > Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi

chart) or

> > from

> > > > > the divisional charts?

> > > > >

> > > > > Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV

ramanji's

> > books,

> > > > > he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

> > > > > In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then

looks at

> > the

> > > > query

> > > > >

> > > > > Pls. advise

> > > > > Thanks

> > > > > Kiran

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know

> > > > how, go to

> > > > http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-

> > 08.html

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Vanakkam Sreenadh and others:This is my first posting in this group.I am not a professional astrologer but astrology and study of ancient world history are my hobbies.With regards to divisional charts, I would like to share some of my thoughts.1. Don't know of any astrologer who would look up the charts without the Navamsa and it happens to be D-9. There are ample slokas in Parasura's BPHS and Jaimani's sutras with respect to Navamsa, Karakamsa., etc.2. BPHS , Chapter 6 & 7(Santhanam's version) talks about the construction of various divisional charts and it's uses.3. Question of twins- Without resorting to the divisional charts how else can we explain the observed differences between twins born few minutes part? Accuracy of any birth chart may vary by few minutes but we need to rectify it. The only way I know is again use the divisional charts against known ocurrences.I am not saying anything here which you all don't know and that is more

than enough reason for me to be perplexed.Regards,anantha krishnanSreenadh <sreesog wrote: Dear Pandit ji, Thanks for sharing the wise words - I agree to you fully. Love and regards, Sreenadh , Panditji <navagraha wrote: > > Namaste Sreenadh, > > I agree fully. I am not getting time these days to participate. I beleive > divisional

charts is one of the biggest > myths created. It is unfortunate we get into argument about twins. I had > discussion on the VA list a few years back on the same inwhich you also > participated. If a couple of minutes of difference can alter the future so > drastically in case of twins, then by same token most of our prediction > should be incorrect as well. Can we say for sure that every natal chart we > get ( of people who are not twins) is accurate to within 2 minutes? I think > not. > > It is just a convenient argument put forth by the school which had made > careers out of divisional charts. They have written so many articles that > now they can not even back out of it. Like Gobel once said a lie repeated 1 > thousand times becomes the truth. > > ... > > > > On 11/14/07, Sreenadh

<sreesog wrote: > > > > Dear Kiran ji, > > I don't agree to PVR's words - he is just echoing the SJC beliefs > > and teachings. Hundreds of SJC beliefs are their which does not have > > a scriptural or logical base at all! So such references does not > > apply in our discussions. PVR is not an ancient scriptural reference > > but only a simple modern day learner, just like all of us, and no > > authority. [PVR is appreciated by me, NOT for his astrological > > knowledge, not for the astrological beliefs he has, not the > > theorizing he does. But instead I appreciate and respect him for his > > unselfish attitude in creating such a good software like Jhora 7.0 > > and distributing it to the world for free] > > The answer to twins problem is not in the Divisional charts but in > > divisions (amsas) -

because that is the thing dealt within ancient > > scripts. Ref to the Kauta Rectification method section in the pdf: > > Sreenadh/ > > Birth%20Rectification%20(Complete).pdf > > - and that may help us to get some more light into this issue > > regarding twins. > > Further twins is not the ultimate, or urgent problem that needs > > sudden solution. There more important, primary problems like 'How to > > predict with the Natal chart?' it self - which even the so-called > > knowledgeable who at times speaks about D-60, D-81, D-150 and what > > not - also seems to miss!! Most of them don't know even how to > > predict with D1 itself, and then what to say about D-60 or 150!! >

> So if you sincerely want to learn astrology, my advice to you is, > > forget all the D-charts as of now, and start with the Basic natal > > chart. If your are sure that you can give at least a 100 trustworthy > > statement that reflect truth based on the Natal chart itself - then > > proceed to learn the other divisions. Otherwise the result would be > > that you will go on learning for decades (like many you may find in > > this group as well), but when presented with a simple natal chart, > > they won't be knowing what to say!! No, not even a trustworthy > > description of 10 lines will come from them! Do you want to waste > > time in that way? I think you won't. That is why the advice, start > > from the basics, and go by the scriptures - always match the logical > > derived results with real life experience. If real life

experience > > does not match with the reference, drop that reference and collect > > and support the references - that really helps you to arrive at > > correct results in no time - means, the trustworthy references that > > helps you to "predict". Astrology is a practical subject for > > PREDICION. > > Note: It is we who choose our path, and our selection creates our > > destiny. > > Love, > > Sreenadh > > > > <% 40>, > > "kiran.rama" > > <kiran.rama@> wrote: > > > > > > Respected Sreenadhji, > > > > > > I am a great fan of your posts - especially the posts on lagna lord > >

in > > > various houses and others that gives any person a scientific way of > > > analyzing different house lords in different houses. > > > > > > There is a contrarian argument to the importance of divisional > > charts > > > - (quoted by PVRji) > > > "That astrological doctrine should not fail the twin test. Twins > > born > > > within 2 minutes of each other should have different futures that > > can > > > be predicted by way of astrology. Going by natal chart only, people > > > born in same duration should have the same futures. So we should > > look > > > at divisional charts and lagnas like Ghati Lagna which changes by > > 1.25 > > > degree for 1 minute change in birth time, Hora Lagna that changes at > > > the rate of one rasi per hour,

etc" > > > > > > Regards > > > Kiran > > > > > > > > > <% 40>, > > "Sreenadh" > > > <sreesog@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Goal ji, > > > > You are utterly wrong - because - > > > > * I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic; and > > as you > > > > may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today is Non- > > vedic. > > > > * Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as vedic/non- > > vedic > > > > etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to > > Rishis - > > > > that

usually does not confirm that those texts were 'actually' > > written > > > > by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which deals > > with > > > > KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do you think > > > > that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century? > > > > * BPHS is just a compilation - you are right. > > > > But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always - trying > > to > > > > project me as some one who is trying to support of the vedas?!! > > Know > > > > that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in > > support of > > > > the Siderial Nonvedic astrology. > > > > The single and simple questions are - > > > > 1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in support > > of > >

> > all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as - > > > > * Use of Divisional charts > > > > * Considering Transit in D-Charts > > > > * Considering aspects in D-charts and so on? > > > > 2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see how > > much > > > > and what you can predict about the native based on the same. > > > > (Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select your D- > > number > > > > as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth > > Date/Time > > > > details won't be given] > > > > Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the ancient > > indian > > > > astrology through the words of ancient sages itself - quoting > > them is > > > > a must. Quoting the modern learners like

- Rath, PVR, BV Raman, KN > > > > Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself - that is > > the way > > > > we chose. > > > > Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one thing, > > and > > > > arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite > > another. In > > > > the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with > > relevant > > > > quotes and practical use. > > > > Love, > > > > Sreenadh > > > > > > > > <% 40>, > > Gopal Goel > > > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote: > > > > > > > > >

> Dear Mr. Kiran, > > > > > I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on divisional > > > > charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views. Probably his > > > > reply is based on following to surmises: > > > > > 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such their > > > > teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not refer > > Vargas > > > > charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as authentic. > > > > > 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION > > > > > In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12 signs > > were not > > > > in use. Should we discard their use. The answer is certainly not. > > > > > Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in predictive > > > > astrology. > >

> > > Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind > > review of > > > > our astrological friends. > > > > > Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool. > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > G.K.GOEL > > > > > Ph: 09350311433 > > > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR > > > > > NEW DELHI-110 076 > > > > > INDIA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kiran.rama <kiran.rama@> > > > > > <% 40> >

> > > > Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM > > > > > Question to Sreenadhji: On > > > > Divisional Charts > > > > > > > > > > Sreenadhji, > > > > > > > > > > What is your opinion on divisional charts method? > > > > > They say first look at query, look at divisional chart for > > query, and > > > > > then look at house. > > > > > There are so many divisional charts. > > > > > > > > > > Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi chart) or > > from > > > > > the divisional charts? > > > > > > > > > > Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV ramanji's > > books, > > > > >

he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries. > > > > > In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then looks at > > the > > > > query > > > > > > > > > > Pls. advise > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Kiran > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To know > > > > how, go to > > > > http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools- > > 08.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

[Guest guest]

Dear Anatha Krinan ji,

Know first things first -

* Division (Amsa) is NOT the same as Divisional Chart (Amsa-

chakra?)

* 1/9 th of a SIGN is called Navamsa. These is well approved by

the ancient texts

* Plotting all these amsas INDEPENDENT OF NATAL CHART and trying

to decipher results from them alone is termed Divisional chart based

reading. This NOT approved by the ancient classics.

* So clearly have the basic understanding that : NAVANMSA IS NOT D-

9.

* The authentic method approved by ancient texts is to: analyze the

natal chart along with NAVAMSA. That means we should write the amsas

out side the Natal chart (liked the mixed chart style in JHora) and

derive derivations based on that. Here everything is reckoned from

Natal Lagna and Navamsa Lagna is NOT the prime focal point. Learn

these basics and how to use it.

==>

> I am not a professional astrologer...

<==

No need to say - it is well evident from your mail itself that, you

lack practical knowledge and understanding in dealing with natal

charts and divisions.

 

Now let us come to the other points you mentioned:

===>

> There are ample slokas in Parasura's BPHS and Jaimani's sutras with

> respect to Navamsa, Karakamsa., etc.

<===

Of course there are slokas available related to Navamsa etc. But

quote them and prove that they are not referring to D-9 and NOT to

Navamsa. Which is essential to prove your argument because you are a

supporter or D9-chart (Navamsa Chart) and NOT Navamsa.

==>

> 2. BPHS , Chapter 6 & 7(Santhanam's version) talks about the

> construction of various divisional charts and it's uses.

<==

Santanam may do anything - but the question is whether the SLOKAS

ITSELF suggest that or not. Santanua is no authority but Parasara is -

so prove your point, by quoting Parasara's original quote and

meaning.

==>

> 3. Question of twins- Without resorting to the divisional charts

> how else can we explain the observed differences between twins born

> few minutes part?

<==

You are not yet matured enough in your learning to take up or

understand this question - first clear the basic doubts, (such as

the confusion between Divisions and Divisional charts etc) and then

we will address this question. Otherwise my answer is NOT going to

help you. If it would - you must have noted that this question is

already answered in some mails in this thread itself. You are not yet

to that level and that is why you missed those answers.

==>

> Accuracy of any birth chart may vary by few minutes but we need to

> rectify it. The only way I know is again use the divisional charts

> against known occurrences.

<==

That simply shows your complete ignorance about birth rectification

methods. Please refer to the pdf available in the files section,

which gives a detailed description of available birth rectification

methods:

Sreenadh/

Birth%20Rectification%20(Complete).pdf

==>

> I am not saying anything here which you all don't know and that is

> more than enough reason for me to be perplexed.

<==

With your current standard of understanding, it is just natural

that you get perplexed. Don't worry about that.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, Anantha Krishnan

<anantha_krishnan_98 wrote:

>

> Vanakkam Sreenadh and others:

> This is my first posting in this group.

> I am not a professional astrologer but astrology and study of

ancient world history are my hobbies.

> With regards to divisional charts, I would like to share some of my

thoughts.

>

> 1. Don't know of any astrologer who would look up the charts

without the Navamsa and it happens to be D-9. There are ample slokas

in Parasura's BPHS and Jaimani's sutras with respect to Navamsa,

Karakamsa., etc.

> 2. BPHS , Chapter 6 & 7(Santhanam's version) talks about the

construction of various divisional charts and it's uses.

> 3. Question of twins- Without resorting to the divisional charts

how else can we explain the observed differences between twins born

few minutes part? Accuracy of any birth chart may vary by few minutes

but we need to rectify it. The only way I know is again use the

divisional charts against known ocurrences.

> I am not saying anything here which you all don't know and that is

more than enough reason for me to be perplexed.

> Regards,

> anantha krishnan

>

> Sreenadh <sreesog wrote: Dear

Pandit ji,

> Thanks for sharing the wise words - I agree to you fully.

> Love and regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> , Panditji

> <navagraha@> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Sreenadh,

> >

> > I agree fully. I am not getting time these days to participate.

I

> beleive

> > divisional charts is one of the biggest

> > myths created. It is unfortunate we get into argument about

twins.

> I had

> > discussion on the VA list a few years back on the same inwhich

you

> also

> > participated. If a couple of minutes of difference can alter the

> future so

> > drastically in case of twins, then by same token most of our

> prediction

> > should be incorrect as well. Can we say for sure that every

natal

> chart we

> > get ( of people who are not twins) is accurate to within 2

minutes?

> I think

> > not.

> >

> > It is just a convenient argument put forth by the school which

had

> made

> > careers out of divisional charts. They have written so many

> articles that

> > now they can not even back out of it. Like Gobel once said a lie

> repeated 1

> > thousand times becomes the truth.

> >

> > ...

> >

> >

> >

> > On 11/14/07, Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Kiran ji,

> > > I don't agree to PVR's words - he is just echoing the SJC

beliefs

> > > and teachings. Hundreds of SJC beliefs are their which does

not

> have

> > > a scriptural or logical base at all! So such references does

not

> > > apply in our discussions. PVR is not an ancient scriptural

> reference

> > > but only a simple modern day learner, just like all of us, and

no

> > > authority. [PVR is appreciated by me, NOT for his astrological

> > > knowledge, not for the astrological beliefs he has, not the

> > > theorizing he does. But instead I appreciate and respect him

for

> his

> > > unselfish attitude in creating such a good software like Jhora

7.0

> > > and distributing it to the world for free]

> > > The answer to twins problem is not in the Divisional charts

but in

> > > divisions (amsas) - because that is the thing dealt within

ancient

> > > scripts. Ref to the Kauta Rectification method section in the

pdf:

> > >

>

Sreenadh/

> > > Birth%20Rectification%20(Complete).pdf

> > > - and that may help us to get some more light into this issue

> > > regarding twins.

> > > Further twins is not the ultimate, or urgent problem that needs

> > > sudden solution. There more important, primary problems

like 'How

> to

> > > predict with the Natal chart?' it self - which even the so-

called

> > > knowledgeable who at times speaks about D-60, D-81, D-150 and

what

> > > not - also seems to miss!! Most of them don't know even how to

> > > predict with D1 itself, and then what to say about D-60 or

150!!

> > > So if you sincerely want to learn astrology, my advice to you

is,

> > > forget all the D-charts as of now, and start with the Basic

natal

> > > chart. If your are sure that you can give at least a 100

> trustworthy

> > > statement that reflect truth based on the Natal chart itself -

> then

> > > proceed to learn the other divisions. Otherwise the result

would

> be

> > > that you will go on learning for decades (like many you may

find

> in

> > > this group as well), but when presented with a simple natal

chart,

> > > they won't be knowing what to say!! No, not even a trustworthy

> > > description of 10 lines will come from them! Do you want to

waste

> > > time in that way? I think you won't. That is why the advice,

start

> > > from the basics, and go by the scriptures - always match the

> logical

> > > derived results with real life experience. If real life

experience

> > > does not match with the reference, drop that reference and

collect

> > > and support the references - that really helps you to arrive at

> > > correct results in no time - means, the trustworthy references

> that

> > > helps you to " predict " . Astrology is a practical subject for

> > > PREDICION.

> > > Note: It is we who choose our path, and our selection creates

our

> > > destiny.

> > > Love,

> > > Sreenadh

> > >

> > > --- In

> <%

> 40>,

> > > " kiran.rama "

> > > <kiran.rama@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Respected Sreenadhji,

> > > >

> > > > I am a great fan of your posts - especially the posts on

lagna

> lord

> > > in

> > > > various houses and others that gives any person a scientific

> way of

> > > > analyzing different house lords in different houses.

> > > >

> > > > There is a contrarian argument to the importance of

divisional

> > > charts

> > > > - (quoted by PVRji)

> > > > " That astrological doctrine should not fail the twin test.

Twins

> > > born

> > > > within 2 minutes of each other should have different futures

> that

> > > can

> > > > be predicted by way of astrology. Going by natal chart only,

> people

> > > > born in same duration should have the same futures. So we

should

> > > look

> > > > at divisional charts and lagnas like Ghati Lagna which

changes

> by

> > > 1.25

> > > > degree for 1 minute change in birth time, Hora Lagna that

> changes at

> > > > the rate of one rasi per hour, etc "

> > > >

> > > > Regards

> > > > Kiran

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > --- In

> <%

> 40>,

> > > " Sreenadh "

> > > > <sreesog@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Goal ji,

> > > > > You are utterly wrong - because -

> > > > > * I am usually in support of the non-vedic and NOT vedic;

and

> > > as you

> > > > > may know the whole astrology itself as we practice today

is

> Non-

> > > vedic.

> > > > > * Rishis are Rishis - the classifications such as

vedic/non-

> > > vedic

> > > > > etc does not apply to them. Texts are usually 'ascribed' to

> > > Rishis -

> > > > > that usually does not confirm that those texts

were 'actually'

> > > written

> > > > > by them. For example take the case of Jaimini sutra which

> deals

> > > with

> > > > > KTPY numebr system originated in 4th century AD only. Do

you

> think

> > > > > that Jaimini lived in AD 4th century?

> > > > > * BPHS is just a compilation - you are right.

> > > > > But I wonder, why you are running to the vedas always -

trying

> > > to

> > > > > project me as some one who is trying to support of the

> vedas?!!

> > > Know

> > > > > that Vedas speaks about Tropical astrology only and I am in

> > > support of

> > > > > the Siderial Nonvedic astrology.

> > > > > The single and simple questions are -

> > > > > 1) Can you quote ANCIENT RISHI HORA SLOKAS which are in

> support

> > > of

> > > > > all the waste now propagated in the name of sages such as -

> > > > > * Use of Divisional charts

> > > > > * Considering Transit in D-Charts

> > > > > * Considering aspects in D-charts and so on?

> > > > > 2) Let us select a D-chart (a blind chart) and let us see

how

> > > much

> > > > > and what you can predict about the native based on the

same.

> > > > > (Astrology is for predicting - for practical use) Select

your

> D-

> > > number

> > > > > as you wish, except the Natal chart. [Note that the birth

> > > Date/Time

> > > > > details won't be given]

> > > > > Since I am (and the group is) trying to understand the

ancient

> > > indian

> > > > > astrology through the words of ancient sages itself -

quoting

> > > them is

> > > > > a must. Quoting the modern learners like - Rath, PVR, BV

> Raman, KN

> > > > > Rao, Santanum etc will not do. Quote the sage itself -

that is

> > > the way

> > > > > we chose.

> > > > > Note: Saying that some new born method is useful is one

thing,

> > > and

> > > > > arguing that the ancient sages supported and used it quite

> > > another. In

> > > > > the case of the second argument - one need to prove it with

> > > relevant

> > > > > quotes and practical use.

> > > > > Love,

> > > > > Sreenadh

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In

> <%

> 40>,

> > > Gopal Goel

> > > > > <gkgoel1937@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Mr. Kiran,

> > > > > > I have seen the reply of our friend Mr. Sreenadh on

> divisional

> > > > > charts , I most humbly beg to differ from his views.

Probably

> his

> > > > > reply is based on following to surmises:

> > > > > > 1. Parasara and Jemini are not Vadic Rishis , as such

their

> > > > > teaching are not worth giving importance . As Veda do not

> refer

> > > Vargas

> > > > > charts , as such these charts should not be accepted as

> authentic.

> > > > > > 2 BPHS IS JUST A COMPILATION

> > > > > > In the days of Vadic era , week days and Zodiac of 12

signs

> > > were not

> > > > > in use. Should we discard their use. The answer is

certainly

> not.

> > > > > > Vargas charts are very effective and potent tool in

> predictive

> > > > > astrology.

> > > > > > Ishall post an article on Vargottama planets for the kind

> > > review of

> > > > > our astrological friends.

> > > > > > Kindly believe me , it is a very powerful tool.

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > G.K.GOEL

> > > > > > Ph: 09350311433

> > > > > > Add: L-409, SARITA VIHAR

> > > > > > NEW DELHI-110 076

> > > > > > INDIA

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > kiran.rama <kiran.rama@>

> > > > > > To:

> <%

> 40>

> > > > > > Thursday, 8 November, 2007 12:02:11 AM

> > > > > > Question to

Sreenadhji:

> On

> > > > > Divisional Charts

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Sreenadhji,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > What is your opinion on divisional charts method?

> > > > > > They say first look at query, look at divisional chart

for

> > > query, and

> > > > > > then look at house.

> > > > > > There are so many divisional charts.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Which is more important? - the results from D-1 (rasi

> chart) or

> > > from

> > > > > > the divisional charts?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Also, what is the specialty of navamsa chart? In BV

> ramanji's

> > > books,

> > > > > > he looks at rasi and navamsa for all queries.

> > > > > > In PVRji's book, he looks at divisional chart and then

> looks at

> > > the

> > > > > query

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Pls. advise

> > > > > > Thanks

> > > > > > Kiran

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. To

know

> > > > > how, go to

> > > > >

http://help./l/in//mail/mail/tools/tools-

> > > 08.html

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Really The Vedas, the egiptians and Maya's were using Divisional

Charts ?

 

I been reading but never posting, I give a brief info about my

profile

 

I'am a loyal supportive of Vedic Civilization since 1975, although I

consider myself a honest Truth seeker and a lover of Human

evolution .

 

born in western family, I joined Bhaktivedanta Sw. Prabhupada on

1975 since them I study and I travel in more than 15 countries

teaching Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Puranas, ayur veda and Yoga. I do

not claim any merit in my own , my greates GOAL is " to be part of

the solution and not part of the problem "

 

On the 90's I joined Osho, I learned only one thing " the art of

meditation " .

 

I'm not an astrologer although I intend to use it one day, more

interested in Medical astrology, in the mean time and Honestly I am

puzzle by the contradictions, that's why I am here because I think

this is the most DOWN TO EARTH jyotish forum in Internet.

 

My fundamental questions are:

 

1 Lest take a City as an Example: A hundred people born at the same

time in the same place none of them has same Prakrity/ vikrity ,

why?, I have not found the answer , and by asking few astrologers

(qualified ones), they give me a very contradictory opinions. Is

there any member of this important Jyotish group who can lead me to

find the correct answer? .

 

2 Divisional charts, how come they can possible work! , if only

few rare people pay attention to the birth time and even by paying

due attention when you check the watches and clocks NOT A SINGLE

ONE is in tune with LMT !.

I wonder how in old times time The horoscopes where calculated with

such a precision to analyze so deep as D30, D60, is that a joke?

Provable The Mayas Egiptians and even the Great ANCIENT Vedic

Civilization has the answer .

 

I not mean to offend any one here.

 

With geat respect

 

Chaitanya S Das

Alfredo Llorente Marcos.

[Guest guest]

Dear Chaitanya ji,

I appreciate the great path of spirituality you took. It needs great

courage to do such a shift from 'Hare Rama Hare Krishna' Bhakti path

to 'the path of meditation' shown to us by Osho. The amount of

sincerity such a shift demands from an individual is so great that, I

feel bowing to you - and giving a hug to you as a sincere fellow

human being.

Now coming to your question on astrology -

==>

> 1 Lest take a City as an Example: A hundred people born at the

> same time in the same place none of them has same Prakrity/

> vikrity , why?

<==

Note the following points -

* Note many even in a very big city takes birth at the same time.

* If they do, FOR SURE they all will have many trends and life

experiences in common. (And that is why we can predict many things to

them using their horoscope, and guide them about their life events)

* BUT their ultimate position and achievements in life depends on

1. The various choices they take in life & their related ones.

2. Thus the life environment they will be surrounded with.

3. The destiny of the place and circumstances they choose to

live.

4. The habits and thoughts they cultivate/develop in them through

their own choices.

These are certainly things beyond the horoscope – or better these are

not things fully within or controlled by `individual destiny'. Thus

the major point to remember is that 'Destiny and Choice (Will) are

equally important'.

Hope this helps.

Love and Hugs,

Sreenadh

 

, " chaived " <chai

wrote:

>

> Really The Vedas, the egiptians and Maya's were using Divisional

> Charts ?

>

> I been reading but never posting, I give a brief info about my

> profile

>

> I'am a loyal supportive of Vedic Civilization since 1975, although

I

> consider myself a honest Truth seeker and a lover of Human

> evolution .

>

> born in western family, I joined Bhaktivedanta Sw. Prabhupada on

> 1975 since them I study and I travel in more than 15 countries

> teaching Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Puranas, ayur veda and Yoga. I

do

> not claim any merit in my own , my greates GOAL is " to be part of

> the solution and not part of the problem "

>

> On the 90's I joined Osho, I learned only one thing " the art of

> meditation " .

>

> I'm not an astrologer although I intend to use it one day, more

> interested in Medical astrology, in the mean time and Honestly I

am

> puzzle by the contradictions, that's why I am here because I think

> this is the most DOWN TO EARTH jyotish forum in Internet.

>

> My fundamental questions are:

>

> 1 Lest take a City as an Example: A hundred people born at the

same

> time in the same place none of them has same Prakrity/ vikrity ,

> why?, I have not found the answer , and by asking few astrologers

> (qualified ones), they give me a very contradictory opinions. Is

> there any member of this important Jyotish group who can lead me to

> find the correct answer? .

>

> 2 Divisional charts, how come they can possible work! , if only

> few rare people pay attention to the birth time and even by paying

> due attention when you check the watches and clocks NOT A SINGLE

> ONE is in tune with LMT !.

> I wonder how in old times time The horoscopes where calculated

with

> such a precision to analyze so deep as D30, D60, is that a joke?

> Provable The Mayas Egiptians and even the Great ANCIENT Vedic

> Civilization has the answer .

>

> I not mean to offend any one here.

>

> With geat respect

>

> Chaitanya S Das

> Alfredo Llorente Marcos.

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Yes Sreenadhji. I agree that not hundreds are born even in a big city at the same time.

 

Secondly, parashara has said in mnay places things like

" If such a combination exists one born in royal family will be great king "

 

Here he is alluding to desh , kaal and sthiti. So someone with similar combination born in humble surroundings will become prominent in his field but not a KIng.

 

....

On 11/16/07, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Chaitanya ji,I appreciate the great path of spirituality you took. It needs great courage to do such a shift from 'Hare Rama Hare Krishna' Bhakti path to 'the path of meditation' shown to us by Osho. The amount of sincerity such a shift demands from an individual is so great that, I feel bowing to you - and giving a hug to you as a sincere fellow human being. Now coming to your question on astrology -==>

> 1 Lest take a City as an Example: A hundred people born at the > same time in the same place none of them has same Prakrity/ > vikrity , why?<==Note the following points -* Note many even in a very big city takes birth at the same time. * If they do, FOR SURE they all will have many trends and life experiences in common. (And that is why we can predict many things to them using their horoscope, and guide them about their life events)* BUT their ultimate position and achievements in life depends on 1. The various choices they take in life & their related ones. 2. Thus the life environment they will be surrounded with.3. The destiny of the place and circumstances they choose to live. 4. The habits and thoughts they cultivate/develop in them through their own choices.These are certainly things beyond the horoscope – or better these are not things fully within or controlled by `individual destiny'. Thus the major point to remember is that 'Destiny and Choice (Will) are equally important'. Hope this helps. Love and Hugs,Sreenadh

, " chaived " <chai wrote:>> Really The Vedas, the egiptians and Maya's were using Divisional > Charts ? > > I been reading but never posting, I give a brief info about my > profile> > I'am a loyal supportive of Vedic Civilization since 1975, although I > consider myself a honest Truth seeker and a lover of Human > evolution .> > born in western family, I joined Bhaktivedanta Sw. Prabhupada on > 1975 since them I study and I travel in more than 15 countries > teaching Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Puranas, ayur veda and Yoga. I do > not claim any merit in my own , my greates GOAL is " to be part of > the solution and not part of the problem " > > On the 90's I joined Osho, I learned only one thing " the art of > meditation " . > > I'm not an astrologer although I intend to use it one day, more > interested in Medical astrology, in the mean time and Honestly I am > puzzle by the contradictions, that's why I am here because I think > this is the most DOWN TO EARTH jyotish forum in Internet. > > My fundamental questions are: > > 1 Lest take a City as an Example: A hundred people born at the same > time in the same place none of them has same Prakrity/ vikrity , > why?, I have not found the answer , and by asking few astrologers > (qualified ones), they give me a very contradictory opinions. Is > there any member of this important Jyotish group who can lead me to > find the correct answer? . > > 2 Divisional charts, how come they can possible work! , if only > few rare people pay attention to the birth time and even by paying > due attention when you check the watches and clocks NOT A SINGLE > ONE is in tune with LMT !. > I wonder how in old times time The horoscopes where calculated with > such a precision to analyze so deep as D30, D60, is that a joke? > Provable The Mayas Egiptians and even the Great ANCIENT Vedic > Civilization has the answer . > > I not mean to offend any one here.

> > With geat respect> > Chaitanya S Das> Alfredo Llorente Marcos.>

[Guest guest]

Dear Pandit ji,

Yes, I agree - Thanks for the valuable note.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, Panditji

<navagraha wrote:

>

> Namaste,

>

> Yes Sreenadhji. I agree that not hundreds are born even in a big

city at the

> same time.

>

> Secondly, parashara has said in mnay places things like

> " If such a combination exists one born in royal family will be

great king "

>

> Here he is alluding to desh , kaal and sthiti. So someone with

similar

> combination born in humble surroundings will become prominent in

his field

> but not a KIng.

>

> ...

>

>

> On 11/16/07, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chaitanya ji,

> > I appreciate the great path of spirituality you took. It needs

great

> > courage to do such a shift from 'Hare Rama Hare Krishna' Bhakti

path

> > to 'the path of meditation' shown to us by Osho. The amount of

> > sincerity such a shift demands from an individual is so great

that, I

> > feel bowing to you - and giving a hug to you as a sincere fellow

> > human being.

> > Now coming to your question on astrology -

> > ==>

> > > 1 Lest take a City as an Example: A hundred people born at the

> > > same time in the same place none of them has same Prakrity/

> > > vikrity , why?

> > <==

> > Note the following points -

> > * Note many even in a very big city takes birth at the same time.

> > * If they do, FOR SURE they all will have many trends and life

> > experiences in common. (And that is why we can predict many

things to

> > them using their horoscope, and guide them about their life

events)

> > * BUT their ultimate position and achievements in life depends on

> > 1. The various choices they take in life & their related ones.

> > 2. Thus the life environment they will be surrounded with.

> > 3. The destiny of the place and circumstances they choose to

> > live.

> > 4. The habits and thoughts they cultivate/develop in them through

> > their own choices.

> > These are certainly things beyond the horoscope – or better these

are

> > not things fully within or controlled by `individual destiny'.

Thus

> > the major point to remember is that 'Destiny and Choice (Will) are

> > equally important'.

> > Hope this helps.

> > Love and Hugs,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > --- In

<%

40>,

> > " chaived " <chai@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Really The Vedas, the egiptians and Maya's were using Divisional

> > > Charts ?

> > >

> > > I been reading but never posting, I give a brief info about my

> > > profile

> > >

> > > I'am a loyal supportive of Vedic Civilization since 1975,

although

> > I

> > > consider myself a honest Truth seeker and a lover of Human

> > > evolution .

> > >

> > > born in western family, I joined Bhaktivedanta Sw. Prabhupada on

> > > 1975 since them I study and I travel in more than 15 countries

> > > teaching Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Puranas, ayur veda and Yoga. I

> > do

> > > not claim any merit in my own , my greates GOAL is " to be part

of

> > > the solution and not part of the problem "

> > >

> > > On the 90's I joined Osho, I learned only one thing " the art of

> > > meditation " .

> > >

> > > I'm not an astrologer although I intend to use it one day, more

> > > interested in Medical astrology, in the mean time and Honestly I

> > am

> > > puzzle by the contradictions, that's why I am here because I

think

> > > this is the most DOWN TO EARTH jyotish forum in Internet.

> > >

> > > My fundamental questions are:

> > >

> > > 1 Lest take a City as an Example: A hundred people born at the

> > same

> > > time in the same place none of them has same Prakrity/ vikrity ,

> > > why?, I have not found the answer , and by asking few

astrologers

> > > (qualified ones), they give me a very contradictory opinions. Is

> > > there any member of this important Jyotish group who can lead

me to

> > > find the correct answer? .

> > >

> > > 2 Divisional charts, how come they can possible work! , if only

> > > few rare people pay attention to the birth time and even by

paying

> > > due attention when you check the watches and clocks NOT A SINGLE

> > > ONE is in tune with LMT !.

> > > I wonder how in old times time The horoscopes where calculated

> > with

> > > such a precision to analyze so deep as D30, D60, is that a joke?

> > > Provable The Mayas Egiptians and even the Great ANCIENT Vedic

> > > Civilization has the answer .

> > >

> > > I not mean to offend any one here.

> > >

> > > With geat respect

> > >

> > > Chaitanya S Das

> > > Alfredo Llorente Marcos.

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>