Combination - what does it mean?

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadh ji, My conclusion is based on some of the statements you made, like: "No planets influence each other (except that gravitation etc) - it only that for the sake of result derivation we IMAGINE that planets influence each other." I don't believe in this school of thought. I do consider planets physically influence each other and us and that is what we study from the charts. Of course, not each and every assumption in astrology can not be explained logically today. But, I believe that it is possible some day in the future. That is the reason, I concluded that there is point in continuing in this discussion as our basic premise itself is diagonally different. Regards, Krishna Sreenadh <sreesog wrote: Dear Krishna ji,There was a typo in previous mail - read - "If you agree OR disagree"Regards,Sreenadh , "Sreenadh"<sreesog wrote:>> Dear Krishna ji,> If you agree of disagree - it would be good for you clear this> ignorance of confusing Varga charts with Shadvarga (lordship). For> your benefit here is basic direction -> 1) Create a chart with Asc lognitude 359 degree 30 min in JHora and> see

the Shardvara (lordships) given for that degree.> 2) Create a chart with Asc longitude 00 degree 30 min in JHora and> see the Shadvarga (lordships) given for that degree.> Note that even JHora does not confuce Varga charts and Shadvarga> (lordships). In the same almost no practcal astrologer can confuce> Varga charts and DIVISIONS OF SIGNS (based on degrees) SUCH AS HORA,> DREKKANA, NAVAMSA, DWADESAMSA. And most of them will also clearly know> that - as subdivisions of sign, they exist in PHYSICAL PLANE.> Hope this helps. If this too is not helpful, sorry, I have done> enough effort, and would like to drop-out from this useless effort to> convince the one who don't want to see the point at all! > Regards,> Sreenadh> > , Krishnamurthy> Seetharama

<krishna_1998@> wrote:> >> > Dear Sreenadh ji,> > > > Now I understand that we have difference of opinion on the basic> premise of Astrology itself. Hence, I see no point in extending this> discussion. I respect your views and at the same time I can not accept> the same.> > > > So let us agree to disagree > > > > Regards,> > Krishna> > > > Sreenadh <sreesog@> wrote:> > Dear Krishna ji,> > ==>> > > since you asked me to check the last degree of pices and first> degree of aries in a varga chart> > <==> > I NEVER requested you to check the last degree of Pisces and> first degree of Aries in a VARGA CHART. > > My request is clearly copy -pasted below for clarity - > > ==>> > I request you to see the Shadvarga of the last

degree of Pisces, and> the first degree of Aries - you will see what I mean!> > <==> > Seeing something in Varga chart and checking the Shadvarga of a> particular degree is entirely different things!!! I wonder why this> confusion! > > ==>> > > But, what I wanted to highlight was that the influence of a planet> does not become NULL at a> > > Rasi border as if there is a wall at the border.> > <==> > No planets influence each other (except that gravitation etc) -> it only that for the sake of result derivation we IMAGINE that planets> influence each other. Why we do so, as per the directions given in> astrological classics (to get the results, the practical usefulness of> the system) we are supposed to follow and regard their construct> (that is the Sign/Nakshatra borders). No border really exists - but> it DOES MATTER in

prediction. And NO INFLUENCE EXIST, and the existing> gravitational influence DOES NOT MATTER in astrology!!> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh> > > > , Krishnamurthy> Seetharama <krishna_1998@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Sreenadh ji,> > > > > > No problem to exchange ideas. I don't misunderstand as long as the> discussion is issue based and does not get personal.> > > > > > When I said varga charts are not in physical plane, what I meant> was the positions of the planets in varga charts and the distance> between them (since you asked me to check the last degree of pices and> first degree of aries in a varga chart).> > > > > > OK, I agree that combustion and

conjunction are two different> things. But, what I wanted to highlight was that the influence of a> planet does not become NULL at a Rasi border as if there is a wall at> the border. It does influence the planet if in close quaters, though> not as much as in the same Rasi. In a same Rasi, two planets are also> linked by the same dispositor and same tatwa (water, air ...) and> hence the intensity of interaction is definitely of higher magnitude.> > > > > > Hope I am clear.> > > > > > Regards,> > > Krishna> > > > > > Sreenadh sreesog@ wrote:> > > Dear Krishna ji,> > > Please don't misunderstand - I NEVER speak/use any kind of Varga> charts - I am speaking about Vargas only and they do really exist in> the phisical plane just like the signs. For example, first Navamsa of> Aries means 0-3.20 of

Aries, and first Dwadasamsa of Aries means> 0-2.30 of Aries and so on - hope you see the point and reality. When I> am speaking about the shad-vargadhipas, I was speaking about the lords> (just like the sign lords) ascribed to these areas in the zodiac -> hope it is clear. > > > ==>> > > > Why do we consider a planet combust when it is very close to the> Sun even when it is not placed in the same sign?> > > <==> > > Because it is combust! But know clearly that conjuction> (related prediction given in classics) and combust (related> predictions given in classics) are 2 different things - and for the> correct application - > > > 1) First one need to check what these results are.> > > 2) Then speak out BOTH THE RESULTS with required modification! > > > Note: It is not that some result will get cancelled and the

other> will prevail! Conjunction and Combust are two SEPERATE things. Hope my> statement is clear enough.> > > Love and regards,> > > Sreenadh> > > > > > , Krishnamurthy> Seetharama krishna_1998@ wrote:> > > >> > > > Dear Sreenadh ji,> > > > > > > > Varga charts are different, they are not in the physical plane,> where as positions in Rasi represents planets in physical plane.> Therefore, it is not fair to compare these two things.> > > > > > > > Why do we consider a planet combust when it is very close to the> Sun even when it is not placed in the same sign?> > > > > > > > Regards,> > > > Krishna> > >

> > > > > > > > > Sreenadh sreesog@ wrote:> > > > Dear Krishna ji,> > > > ==>> > > > > Is there a solid wall at the Rasi border?> > > > <== > > > > There is NO WALL between the Rasi borders - but there is MUCH> LIMITATION associated with the tool (i.e. astrology) you are using!> Know the methodology and the hypothetical (projected) picture (i.e.> natal chart with sign/nakshatra/amsa divisions) used by astrology. You> CANNOT drive a tool beyond its limits! If you do you will end up> breaking the tool itself and losing even this minor tool! > > > > The point is - for predictive purpose we need to differentiate> the results provided by the signs (even though there is no border in> between), because it is the way the tool itself is hypothised. To> understand it clearly - I

request you to see the Shadvarga of the last> degree of Pisces, and the first degree of Aries - you will see what I> mean! Hope this helps. > > > > Note: I don't want to lose the tool itself, but want to "use it,> as directed (by the sages)" - and that is the point I want to make.> And I hope, that is the way any one who respectes and want to use (and> derive the correct results, as per the methodology provided by ancient> indian sages will do and follow. There is NO OTHER WAY - Either> discard signs or accept the borders, NOT as a reality, but for> practical use of the tool.> > > > Love and regards,> > > > Sreenadh> > > > , Krishnamurthy> Seetharama krishna_1998@ wrote:> > > > >> > > >

> I don't know if the country border is a right analogy here.> Even then, if we put up a bright light in our area close to the> boarder, will the light not reach the other side of the border?> > > > > > > > > > When combustion can take place across Rasi boarders, how can> we say the other planetory influences stop right at the Rasi border?> Is there a solid wall at the Rasi border?> > > > > > > > > > Amsahs change within a sign as well. But, how is it relevant> to the question being debated?> > > > > > > > > > Regards,> > > > > Krishna> > > > > > > > > > sreeram srinivas sreeram64@ wrote:> > > > > Dear Madam,> > > > > Let us take an analogy, of less than One Degree difference at> "our borders" i.e India-Pakistan,

Pakistan-China, India-China !!> People on either side of "fence" are generally not so much bother> about his as much as the people "resting" in their respectivecapitals !! > > > > > There has lot of debate in past over this, even Late Sri P.S.> Shastry has concluded that the zodaic is divided on "equal house" basis.> > > > > The use of "Sudharshan Chakra" would give better picture, for> the "difference in degree" would result in change in "amsa " position> !!...> > > > > "Near Degrees" concept and its Octave Vibration, is probably a> western astrology concept or Tajak Concept, to an extent also used in> Prasna Marga i.e. Mother scripture !!> > > > > with regards,> > > > > sreeram_srinivas> > > > > > > > > > , "vinita> kumar" shankar_mamta@ wrote:> > > > > > > > > > Dear Shreenadhji,> > > > > > > > > > "A combination means same signs, or aspect between planets from> > > > > different signs etc, and the degrees of difference DOES NOT> come into> > > > > picture here".> > > > > > > > > > But doesn't it?... as in the case of combustion? if it canmatter > > > > > for planets close to the sun in the same sign, why cannot it> matter > > > > > for proximity of other planets???Supposing two planets are> within 2-> > > > > 3 degrees of each other in the same sign whould their effecthave > > > > > been the same if

one had been at say the 1st degree of the> sign and > > > > > the other at the 29th degree?...am just wondering whetherthis is > > > > > discussed as part of the clasical system or not? Are degrees> only of > > > > > relevance for divisionals? aren't they also taken into account> while > > > > > considering exaltation and debility? Or even baal and vridha > > > > > avastha, etc. for strenght???So if planets can be strong or> weak in > > > > > some degrees cannot their influence be governed by "close"> proximity > > > > > as opposed to "distant" proximity? (In western astrology,> though it > > > > > is a totally different system, stellium, or very close> proximity of > > > > > 3 or more planets, is considered to be an important>

influence....But > > > > > i know i shouldn't mix up the two)> > > > > > > > > > Conversely, if there are two planets in close proximity, say> within > > > > > 2 degrees of each other, but in different signs, accordingto u / > > > > > the classics, there is NO sambandh between the two????????> > > > > > > > > > "Astro classics speak about 5 major types of Sambhadha> (relations). Explore it ;)"> > > > > > > > > > Long time back i learnt abt this in one of the lessons of > > > > > Sanjayrathji....but i have clean forgotton... guess i am> getting old > > > > > and rusty:(> > > > > > > > > > how abt. helping out;))> > > > > > > > > > Best regards,> >

> > > vinita> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with > Mobile. Try it now.> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with > Mobile. Try it now.> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with > Search.> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with > Search.> >>

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.

[Guest guest]

Dear Vinita ji,

As you rightly pointed out - Yuti is a type of Sambandh and Aspect

another.

==>

> So naturally the influence of the sambandh by way of drishti should

> be " qualitatively " dissimilar to that of sambandh by way of yuti.

<==

Yes, to an extend - but since both of them is nothing but the mixing

of the significance of the planets involved, there is much similarity

as well. The subject of Yuti and Drishti are discussed seperatly in

classics. It could also be due to the fact that unlike Yuti, the

aspecting planet would be influencing a different set of signs/houses

as well. The difference ascribed to Yuti and Aspect(drishti) result of

the same planets is a possible area of research to identify the

factors considered by the sages.

Conjunction of planets in same Nakshatra or Aspect (Drishti) of

planets in opposing Nakshatras could be of much importance - but we a

less number of quotes available regarding the such Stellar based

prediction - and this is another area of research. But as of now, we

cannot depend on this, and concentrate more on the first section for

which enough quotes are available.

Love,

Sreenadh

 

, " vinita kumar "

<shankar_mamta wrote:

>

> Dear shreenadhji,

>

> many thanks for clarifying so many things on sambandh! what i liked

> most was the " virtual " construct of horoscopes which has nothing to

> do with the " physical " construct, such as gravitational pulls,

> physical proximity, etc.

>

> now if the subject is not getting too long, i think most of our

> discussion has centred around yuti as a type of sambandh. The

> planets by being deposited in the same sign share the tatvas and

> gunas of that sign and therefore are in sambandh with each other.

>

> What abt. aspects as another type of sambandh? i had read somewhere

> (and by no means in a classic) that aspects are like having the

> planet in the same sign that it is aspecting. But it stands to

> reason that the planet that aspects another sign must carry

> influence the tatvas and gunas of the sign where it is deposited. So

> naturally the influence of the sambandh by way of drishti should

> be " qualitatively " dissimilar to that of sambandh by way of yuti.

>

> is the abvoe interpretation correct?

> do classics differentiate between the different types of sambandh

> and their influence?

> are there only qualitative differences or difference in potency as

> well?

> can one say that dristhi of the planet, since it carries the

> influence of the sign where it is deposited, makes a bit of a

> khitchri of the sign and planet it aspects...and therefore

> conjunction is a " purer " /less of a khitchri type of influence?

> leaving aside the degrees in the sign, don't u think that planets

> posited in the same nakshatra in a sign (which also means that they

> are closer together in terms of degrees) become more potent in

> conjunction carrying the characteristics of the same nakshatra?

> there are natshatras that " spill over " to another sign...in which

> case will planets situated in the same nakshatra but posited in 2

> different signs carry some influence of conjunction?

> (i suspect what your reaction to this would be ...As for me, u

> would know that i am trying to sneak in the earlier argument in a

> different guise;)))

>

> i know these are hypothetical questions and may have no relationship

> with what is written in classics....but i ask them nevertheless for

> greater clarity to my understanding....and for an interpretation

> thru classics of different forms of sambandha among planets!

>

> hope u and others don't mind.

>

> warm regards,

> vinita

>