Functional Benefics vs. Natural Benefics

November 13, 2007

A natural benefic planet may give bad results like a malefic ->

Everything depends on the lagna

As per the lagna, planets are classified as functional benefic and

functional malefic (Per bvRamanji, benefics for a lagna are the lords

of 1,5,9 houses and lords of 4,7,10 when they are not natural benefics).

Given that all benefic/malefic analysis is based on the functional

benefic/malefic nature: Does a planet being a natural benefic have any

significance at all in predictive astrology?

November 13, 2007

Dear Kiran ji,

==>

> Does a planet being a natural benefic have any

> significance at all in predictive astrology?

<==

Yes, in several situations it is used - and in several situations as

a general, easy solution as well. I will clarify -

1) while writing books if someone needs to refer to Ju, Ve, Me (not

conjunct with malefic), Moon (with Pakshabala) together - there

should be some abbreviated notation to use. Every where the author

cannot list all these planets - so the use of the word - Subha/Saumya

(Benefic). Same is true for - Papa (Malefic), which in general refer

to Sa, Ma, Su, Ra, Ke, Moon (without Pakshabala), Me (with malefic).

2) In the above generalized way the same can be easily used in

prediction as well - even though specific results may need

modification. For example, in Prasnamara 14th chapter, you will find

some slokas starting with the one -

" Pape lagna gathe parajaya sirorug dukha dushkeertaya.. " etc and

" Saume lagna gathe sukhastiti jayarogyartha sampattaya " etc.

Meaning " If a natural malefic is in lagna the native may have

diseases related to head, sadness, fame for bad deeds etc. " and " If a

natural benefic is in lagna happiness, win, good health, wealth etc "

- can be predicted and so on. [Collect these slokas and memorize them]

As you could see those are general predictions - but usually easy

solution for any beginner and fits in well with reality. (means they

are dependable slokas giving correct results - even though one

shouldn't depend on them for 100% true results or specific results).

Thus all classifications such as Benefic/Malefic etc are to help

getting a start, to help the authors of books use abbreviated

notations while describing Yogas, to be used in some specific yogas

and so on. Hope this helps.

Love,

Sreenadh

, " kiran.rama "

<kiran.rama wrote:

>

> A natural benefic planet may give bad results like a malefic ->

> Everything depends on the lagna

>

> As per the lagna, planets are classified as functional benefic and

> functional malefic (Per bvRamanji, benefics for a lagna are the

lords

> of 1,5,9 houses and lords of 4,7,10 when they are not natural

benefics).

>

> Given that all benefic/malefic analysis is based on the functional

> benefic/malefic nature: Does a planet being a natural benefic have

any

> significance at all in predictive astrology?

>

November 14, 2007

Dear Sreenadji,

True. The term used for Surya and Mangal should be Krur grahas denoting their nature but sometimes astrologers use the word malefic in English and distinction between Krur and melefic (paap graha) IS LOST IN TRANSLATION.

If lagna lord is mangal it cannot give bad results to the Jataka. However true to its nature it will probably destroy some other house which it is aspecting, transiting or is connected to , through Mahadasha/Antaradasha etc.

I have personally seen people with debilitated Guru ( natural benefic) commit cheapest of scams whereas people with debilitated Sani (natural malefic) suffering however not harming anybody else.Like in life there are grey shades in astrology. After all Lord Ram had maximum number of benefics possible and yet underwent trials and tribulations even if he became immortal to us.

Malefics are supposed to give good results in 3,6,11 houses. Benifics are better off in Kendra's, trikonas.

Malefics if debilitated become powerful i.e. their results are magnified and therfore horrible. Benefics if debilitated give lesser result.

Benefics and malefics are everchanging in nature due to naisargic (natural) mitrata,shatruta etc. Also a yoga karka may give bad results in mahadasha if antardasha is that of its natural enemy.

Regards

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

Sreenadh <sreesog Re: Functional Benefics vs. Natural Benefics Date: Wednesday, 14 November, 2007, 11:24 AM

Dear Kiran ji,==>> Does a planet being a natural benefic have any> significance at all in predictive astrology?<==Yes, in several situations it is used - and in several situations as a general, easy solution as well. I will clarify -1) while writing books if someone needs to refer to Ju, Ve, Me (not conjunct with malefic), Moon (with Pakshabala) together - there should be some abbreviated notation to use. Every where the author cannot list all these planets - so the use of the word - Subha/Saumya (Benefic). Same is true for - Papa (Malefic), which in general refer to Sa, Ma, Su, Ra, Ke, Moon (without Pakshabala), Me (with malefic). 2) In the above generalized way the same can be easily used in prediction as well - even though specific results may need modification. For example, in Prasnamara 14th chapter, you will find some slokas starting with the one - "Pape lagna gathe

parajaya sirorug dukha dushkeertaya. ." etc and "Saume lagna gathe sukhastiti jayarogyartha sampattaya" etc.Meaning "If a natural malefic is in lagna the native may have diseases related to head, sadness, fame for bad deeds etc." and "If a natural benefic is in lagna happiness, win, good health, wealth etc" - can be predicted and so on. [Collect these slokas and memorize them]As you could see those are general predictions - but usually easy solution for any beginner and fits in well with reality. (means they are dependable slokas giving correct results - even though one shouldn't depend on them for 100% true results or specific results). Thus all classifications such as Benefic/Malefic etc are to help getting a start, to help the authors of books use abbreviated notations while describing Yogas, to be used in some specific yogas and so on. Hope this helps.Love,Sreenadh ancient_indian_ astrology, "kiran.rama" <kiran.rama@ ...> wrote:>> A natural benefic planet may give bad results like a malefic ->> Everything depends on the lagna> > As per the lagna, planets are classified as functional benefic and> functional malefic (Per bvRamanji, benefics for a lagna are the lords> of 1,5,9 houses and lords of 4,7,10 when they are not natural benefics).> > Given that all benefic/malefic analysis is based on the functional> benefic/malefic nature: Does a planet being a natural benefic have any> significance at all in predictive astrology?>

Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.

November 14, 2007

Hi Chiranjiv ji,

Yes, I agree to you - the are several inconsistencies like that

related to the use of words - for example the word Agneya Graha

(Fiery planet) and Papa Graha (Malefic planet) provides us with

different list - but now a days these words are translated and being

used as if they represent one and the same list of malefics. Yes, it

happens - and many subtile ideas are lost in translations. Thanks

for sharing the knowledge.

Love,

Sreenadh

Re: Re: Functional Benefics vs. Natural

Benefics

Dear Sreenadji,

True. The term used for Surya and Mangal should be Krur grahas

denoting their nature but sometimes astrologers use the word malefic

in English and distinction between Krur and melefic (paap graha) IS

LOST IN TRANSLATION.

If lagna lord is mangal it cannot give bad results to the Jataka.

However true to its nature it will probably destroy some other house

which it is aspecting, transiting or is connected to , through

Mahadasha/Antaradasha etc.

I have personally seen people with debilitated Guru ( natural

benefic) commit cheapest of scams whereas people with debilitated

Sani (natural malefic) suffering however not harming anybody

else.Like in life there are grey shades in astrology. After all Lord

Ram had maximum number of benefics possible and yet underwent trials

and tribulations even if he became immortal to us.

Malefics are supposed to give good results in 3,6,11 houses. Benifics

are better off in Kendra's, trikonas.

Malefics if debilitated become powerful i.e. their results are

magnified and therfore horrible. Benefics if debilitated give lesser

result.

Benefics and malefics are everchanging in nature due to naisargic

(natural) mitrata,shatruta etc. Also a yoga karka may give bad

results in mahadasha if antardasha is that of its natural enemy.

Regards

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

Sreenadh <sreesog

Re: Functional Benefics vs.

Natural Benefics

Wednesday, 14 November, 2007, 11:24 AM

Dear Kiran ji,

==>

> Does a planet being a natural benefic have any

> significance at all in predictive astrology?

<==

Yes, in several situations it is used - and in several situations as

a general, easy solution as well. I will clarify -

1) while writing books if someone needs to refer to Ju, Ve, Me (not

conjunct with malefic), Moon (with Pakshabala) together - there

should be some abbreviated notation to use. Every where the author

cannot list all these planets - so the use of the word - Subha/Saumya

(Benefic). Same is true for - Papa (Malefic), which in general refer

to Sa, Ma, Su, Ra, Ke, Moon (without Pakshabala), Me (with malefic).

2) In the above generalized way the same can be easily used in

prediction as well - even though specific results may need

modification. For example, in Prasnamara 14th chapter, you will find

some slokas starting with the one -

" Pape lagna gathe parajaya sirorug dukha dushkeertaya. . " etc and