Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna

[Guest guest]

Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna

 

Marriage Muhurta Lagna â€" here after denoted as MML

Base Thoughts

Today I was reading Muhurta Chintamani of Rama Daivajna; a text written in Kashmir around AD 1600. This text on Muhurta is blessed with an excellent Sanskrit commentry with the name Piyushadhara written by Sri Govinda Jyotirvid. Muhurta Chintamani with Piyushadhara commentry is an excellent treasure on which a seeker of astrological knowledge can meditate upon for years. [The same is true for Brihat Daivajna Ranjana written by Rama Daivajna as well. Other two texts of the same class are Jyotir Nibanddha and Jaganmohana by Mukunda Daivajna Unfortunately I am yet to have a copy of these two ancient excellent texts; But I know that they are available.]

The quote I went through today reads â€"

Jamitram dwividham proktam garga galava gautamaiH

Tasmallagnacha chandracha Jamitram parivarjayet.

Meaning, The ancient scholars Garga, Galava and Gautama say that 7th house is of 2 type â€" one, 7th from Lagna & 2nd, 7th house from Moon. Because of this, planets in 7th (of MML) from both Lagna and Moon should be avoided.

 

First I thought a bit well about this quote due to the following facts -

· The quote refer to the name of some great sages viz. Garga, Galava and Gautama

· It provides us with a guideline such as ‘Any planet in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should be avoided.

But then on re-thought it revealed to me that it could be one of those misguiding quotes due to the following facts â€"

· Even though the above quote mentions the names of 3 ancient sages, none of the available quotes by the above sages (E.g. Garga) mention anything similar.

· The quote it self is a father-less/auther-less quote; a quote presented with the words ‘uktam cha’ (it is told that); who tells this? Which sage? There is no info!

· Too much importance to Muhurta is a Vedic and Medieval concept rather than an Ancient Non-Vedic concept. (Astrology as we know is an ancient non-vedic branch of knowledge)

· Malefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna providing bad results is an understandable possibility; well supported by the standard result derivation concepts. But why Benefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should provide bad results?! What is the logic behind? It seems totally absurd.

I felt that I have encountered a misguiding quote, which pretends to be authentic. If this is true, then certainly there is something to study and discuss in this quote. With these basic thoughts, I decided to spend some time to analyze this concept of ‘Bad results attributed to ALL the planets from 7th of Muhurta Lagna’.

Analyze

The word ‘Jamitra’ indicate one who is ‘friend from birth’ or the ‘soul mate’; the compliment/soul mate to body (Lagna) and mind (Moon). This concept of ‘soul mate’ (The friend, pre-destined from birth itself) must have been pretty ancient concept as clear from the reference to the ancient sages.

Garga - Author of Garga Hora, Garga Samhita etc

Galava - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of this ancient sage

Gautama - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of this sage as well. Some believe that the name of Sage Kasyapa was Gautama.

This quote is curious not only because it refers to these ancient sages, but also because it tell us that ‘Even as per the ancient sages the presence of ANY planet (both benefic and malefic), in 7th from Lagna or Moon is inauspicious (for a Marriage Muhurta)’! Malefic in 7th considered as inauspicious is OK, but why benefic in 7th?! Is it a mistake or an intentional misinterpretation? Is there a solid logic behind or as illogical as attributing too much importance to Muhurtas? To answer this, we would have to go through the ancient classic quotes available on this and clarify what they say. I started my search -

In Support Of

As per Madhaveeya â€"

If malefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then death of husband results; If benefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then separation results.

As per Maheswara Acharya (from Muhurta Chintamani) -

Lagnat seetakarat graha dyunagata neshta vivahe smrita (Maheswara Acharya)

Planets in 7th house from MML is NOT good.

As per Vasishta Samhita -

Sarve Jamitra Samsta Vidadhati Maranam (Vasishta Samhita)

Any planet placed in 7th of Muhurta Lagna indicate untimely death.

Please note that, available Vasishta Samhita is NOT an ancient text, and follows Tropical Zodiac.

As per Mihira(?) -

Mihira in Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita elaborates the bad results attributed to planets in 7th of MML as â€"

Sourara jeeva budha rahu raveendu sukraH

kuryuH prasahya khalu saptama rasi samsthaH

vaidhavya bandhana vadha kheya vittanasa-

vyadhi pravasa maranani yadha kremena

(from Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita)

Meaning, the following results can be attributed to planets placed in 7th house of MML â€"

Saturn in 7th - Divorce/Death

Mars in 7th - Imprisonment

Jupiter in 7th - Murder/Death

Rahu in 7th - Loss of money

Sun in 7th - Disease

Moon in 7th - Life abroad (away from wife)

Venus in 7th - Death

Many scholars think that Vivaha patala was added to Brihat Samhita later and is NOT written by Mihira. In the above quote, apart from general though “ANY planet in 7th house from MML indicate bad resultsâ€, the above quote seems to over-state the results. Definitely the simple Muhurta CANNOT has this much important influence on future results. If the native’s chart indicates longevity, then simply because at the time of marriage the 7th house from lagna was occupied by Venus or so, predicting that he will have an untimely death is simply illogical. Attributing deadly strong results such as death to Muhurtas selected for simple events is nothing but an insult to true and sincere astrology. This nasty emphasis on strong results from simple general combinations and events is what makes astrology a trash mount with rare gems only.

In general the texts and acharyas who support this ‘Extra importance to Muhurta’ seems to be of Medieval or Vedic origin. The same seems to be true for the concept ‘All planets gives bad results in 7th of MML’ as well. The people who support this theory are Madhavacharya, Chandeswara, Mihira(?),Vasista Samhita author etc. The texts Madhaveeya, Prashna Chandeswara, Vivaha Patala, Vasishta Samhita etc are all of medieval origin.

This may not be the opinion of real ancient sages; this may not be the opinion of even the Garga, Galava and Gautama our original quote was referring. But how to prove this? How to prove that original logical opinion was that “Malefics in 7th of MML is Bad; and Benefics in 7th of MML is GOODâ€? Of course we would have to provide some evidence â€" some sage quotes that mention exactly the same. Are such quotes available? Did the true ancient astrology able to survive the thunderstorm caused by the FAKE Muhurta theorists and specialist (most of whom are of vedic and tropical astrological followers and Brahmins)? Yes! In the next section, I will try provide some such quotes.

Against

Let us start from a quote of ancient scholar Bhujabala, provided in Muhurta Chintamani.

Chandrat Saptama Rasige dinakare tyekta dhanaiH kanyaka

Bhoume cha pramada prayati vilayam saurena vandhya saruk

JeevaH sukra sasankajau subhakaraH kechidvadanti kramat-

Bhartrir prepsita deekshitastabhavane nityam pravasanvita.

(BujabalaH, Muhurta Chintamani)

Meaning, if the 7th house from Moon sign at the time of marriage Muhurta is occupied by planets then the following results can be predicted â€"

Sun â€" loss of money to wife

Mars â€" death/loss of wife

Saturn â€" impotency to wife/disease

Jupiter, Venus, Moon â€" gives good results.

But as per others opinion, any of these planets (Ju, Ve, Mo) are present in 7th then, bound in sadness waiting for the husband in distant land could be the result.

 

The above quote and meaning seems to be unique as Acharya Bhujabala tells us that ascribing bad results to Benefics in 7th from MML is NOT his opinion but of others. Bhujabala is of the opinion that benefics like Ju, Ve, Mo in 7th of MML will give beneficial results.

Good that we have found at least one acharya who speaks logically. Actually Bhugabala is NOT alone â€" it is the opinion of ALL the ancient sages! For example Brihat Daivajna Ranjana provides us the following quote of Sage Atri â€"

Yamitrago yadi bhavedusana budho va

geervana natha sachivaH sitapaksha chandraH

Kanya vivaha samaye subhamamananti

Manv-atri-narada-vasishta-parasaradyaH

(Sage Atri, Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)

Meaning, if the 7th house from MML is occupied by any benefic planet such as Venus, Mercury, Jupiter or Waning Moon then great ancient sages like Manu, Atri, Narada, Vasishta and Parasara attributes good results for the same (and NOT bad results).

To emphasis this point, Rama Daivajna, the author of the great text called Brihat Daivajna Ranjana quotes the following sloka as well â€"

Manu-Sandhilya-Mandhavya-Bharadvaj-Atri-GautamaH

Yamitre tu prasamsantiH budhajeevosanaH subhaH

(Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)

Meaning, Sages like Manu, Sandhilya, Mandhavaya, Bharadvaja, Atri, Gautama are all of the opinion that ‘If benefic planets are present in 7th house from MML then benefic results should be predicted (and NOT bad results)â€.

Earlier in the quote given at the beginning of this article we saw that, some unauthentic quotes by FAKE scholars tried to attribute the owner ship of the wrong argument “Benefic in 7th from MML gives bad results†to ancient and revered sages like Gautama, Garga etc. But the authentic quote of Atri and the quotes provided by Brihat Daivajna Ranjana reveal that it is not so; they clarify that almost all the sages such as Atri, Manu, Mandhavya, Parasara etc including Gautama is of the opinion that “Benefic in 7th from MML gives GOOD resultsâ€. The available quotes of Garga too prompts us to think that he too supports this opinion itself and not the first.

I feel that the 2nd opinion is better, logical, and supported by sages. The 1st opinion seems to be medieval origin and seems to depend on some fake quotes.

End Note

· The hardest task in astrology learning is to differentiate the worthy knowledge from the trash mount present.

· The hardest task at our hand is to save this beautiful knowledge branch astrology from the fake scholars; scholars who make instant theories in an effort to earn name, fame and money. To save astrology from the irresponsible fake masters who theorize without sincerity as if astrology is like instant coffee â€" a use and throw subject!

· The hardest task for us is to unlearn the trash learned and start again from the basics!

 

Since I have already provided you with the seed of a controversy, I stop here, expecting you all to take over.

- 0 -

[Guest guest]

Hare rama krishna

dear sreenadh ji

Good article .

In kerala major traditional view is (same as per Varaha Hora ) that there shud b astamaya sudhi ,means no planets shud b in 7th House .But there is no problem for the rasi Lords sitting in the house .

Then all other parametrs apply .

If some memebrs can post some muhurtha charts will some informations we can see in comparison with above statements .

It will b a good learning exprnce too

 

regrds sunil nair

om shreem mahalaxmai namah .

 

, "Sreenadh" <sreesog wrote:>> > Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna> > > > Marriage Muhurta Lagna â€" here after denoted as MML> > Base Thoughts> > Today I was reading Muhurta Chintamani of Rama Daivajna; a text written> in Kashmir around AD 1600. This text on Muhurta is blessed with an> excellent Sanskrit commentry with the name Piyushadhara written by Sri> Govinda Jyotirvid. Muhurta Chintamani with Piyushadhara commentry is an> excellent treasure on which a seeker of astrological knowledge can> meditate upon for years. [The same is true for Brihat Daivajna Ranjana> written by Rama Daivajna as well. Other two texts of the same class are> Jyotir Nibanddha and Jaganmohana by Mukunda Daivajna Unfortunately I am> yet to have a copy of these two ancient excellent texts; But I know that> they are available.]> > The quote I went through today reads â€"> > Jamitram dwividham proktam garga galava gautamaiH> > Tasmallagnacha chandracha Jamitram parivarjayet.> > Meaning, The ancient scholars Garga, Galava and Gautama say that 7th> house is of 2 type â€" one, 7th from Lagna & 2nd, 7th house from> Moon. Because of this, planets in 7th (of MML) from both Lagna and Moon> should be avoided.> > > > First I thought a bit well about this quote due to the following facts -> > · The quote refer to the name of some great sages viz. Garga,> Galava and Gautama> > · It provides us with a guideline such as ‘Any planet> in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should be avoided.> > But then on re-thought it revealed to me that it could be one of those> misguiding quotes due to the following facts â€"> > · Even though the above quote mentions the names of 3 ancient> sages, none of the available quotes by the above sages (E.g. Garga)> mention anything similar.> > · The quote it self is a father-less/auther-less quote; a> quote presented with the words ‘uktam cha’ (it is told> that); who tells this? Which sage? There is no info!> > · Too much importance to Muhurta is a Vedic and Medieval> concept rather than an Ancient Non-Vedic concept. (Astrology as we know> is an ancient non-vedic branch of knowledge)> > · Malefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna providing bad results is> an understandable possibility; well supported by the standard result> derivation concepts. But why Benefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should> provide bad results?! What is the logic behind? It seems totally absurd.> > I felt that I have encountered a misguiding quote, which pretends to be> authentic. If this is true, then certainly there is something to study> and discuss in this quote. With these basic thoughts, I decided to spend> some time to analyze this concept of ‘Bad results attributed to> ALL the planets from 7th of Muhurta Lagna’.> > Analyze> > The word ‘Jamitra’ indicate one who is> ‘friend from birth’ or the ‘soul mate’; the> compliment/soul mate to body (Lagna) and mind (Moon). This concept of> ‘soul mate’ (The friend, pre-destined from birth itself)> must have been pretty ancient concept as clear from the reference to the> ancient sages.> > Garga - Author of Garga Hora, Garga Samhita etc> > Galava - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of> this ancient sage> > Gautama - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of> this sage as well. Some believe that the name of Sage Kasyapa was> Gautama.> > This quote is curious not only because it refers to these ancient> sages, but also because it tell us that ‘Even as per the ancient> sages the presence of ANY planet (both benefic and malefic), in 7th from> Lagna or Moon is inauspicious (for a Marriage Muhurta)’! Malefic> in 7th considered as inauspicious is OK, but why benefic in 7th?! Is it> a mistake or an intentional misinterpretation? Is there a solid logic> behind or as illogical as attributing too much importance to Muhurtas?> To answer this, we would have to go through the ancient classic quotes> available on this and clarify what they say. I started my search -> > In Support Of> > As per Madhaveeya â€"> > If malefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then death of> husband results; If benefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then> separation results.> > As per Maheswara Acharya (from Muhurta Chintamani) -> > Lagnat seetakarat graha dyunagata neshta vivahe smrita (Maheswara> Acharya)> > Planets in 7th house from MML is NOT good.> > As per Vasishta Samhita -> > Sarve Jamitra Samsta Vidadhati Maranam (Vasishta Samhita)> > Any planet placed in 7th of Muhurta Lagna indicate untimely death.> > Please note that, available Vasishta Samhita is NOT an ancient text, and> follows Tropical Zodiac.> > As per Mihira(?) -> > Mihira in Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita elaborates the bad> results attributed to planets in 7th of MML as â€"> > Sourara jeeva budha rahu raveendu sukraH> > kuryuH prasahya khalu saptama rasi samsthaH> > vaidhavya bandhana vadha kheya vittanasa-> > vyadhi pravasa maranani yadha kremena> > (from Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita)> > Meaning, the following results can be attributed to planets placed in> 7th house of MML â€"> > Saturn in 7th - Divorce/Death> > Mars in 7th - Imprisonment> > Jupiter in 7th - Murder/Death> > Rahu in 7th - Loss of money> > Sun in 7th - Disease> > Moon in 7th - Life abroad (away from wife)> > Venus in 7th - Death> > Many scholars think that Vivaha patala was added to Brihat Samhita> later and is NOT written by Mihira. In the above quote, apart from> general though “ANY planet in 7th house from MML indicate bad> resultsâ€, the above quote seems to over-state the results.> Definitely the simple Muhurta CANNOT has this much important influence> on future results. If the native’s chart indicates longevity,> then simply because at the time of marriage the 7th house from lagna was> occupied by Venus or so, predicting that he will have an untimely death> is simply illogical. Attributing deadly strong results such as death to> Muhurtas selected for simple events is nothing but an insult to true and> sincere astrology. This nasty emphasis on strong results from simple> general combinations and events is what makes astrology a trash mount> with rare gems only.> > In general the texts and acharyas who support this ‘Extra> importance to Muhurta’ seems to be of Medieval or Vedic origin.> The same seems to be true for the concept ‘All planets gives bad> results in 7th of MML’ as well. The people who support this> theory are Madhavacharya, Chandeswara, Mihira(?),Vasista Samhita author> etc. The texts Madhaveeya, Prashna Chandeswara, Vivaha Patala, Vasishta> Samhita etc are all of medieval origin.> > This may not be the opinion of real ancient sages; this may not be the> opinion of even the Garga, Galava and Gautama our original quote was> referring. But how to prove this? How to prove that original logical> opinion was that “Malefics in 7th of MML is Bad; and Benefics in> 7th of MML is GOODâ€? Of course we would have to provide some> evidence â€" some sage quotes that mention exactly the same. Are> such quotes available? Did the true ancient astrology able to survive> the thunderstorm caused by the FAKE Muhurta theorists and specialist> (most of whom are of vedic and tropical astrological followers and> Brahmins)? Yes! In the next section, I will try provide some such> quotes.> > Against> > Let us start from a quote of ancient scholar Bhujabala, provided> in Muhurta Chintamani.> > Chandrat Saptama Rasige dinakare tyekta dhanaiH kanyaka> > Bhoume cha pramada prayati vilayam saurena vandhya saruk> > JeevaH sukra sasankajau subhakaraH kechidvadanti kramat-> > Bhartrir prepsita deekshitastabhavane nityam pravasanvita.> > (BujabalaH, Muhurta Chintamani)> > Meaning, if the 7th house from Moon sign at the time of marriage Muhurta> is occupied by planets then the following results can be predicted> â€"> > Sun â€" loss of money to wife> > Mars â€" death/loss of wife> > Saturn â€" impotency to wife/disease> > Jupiter, Venus, Moon â€" gives good results.> > But as per others opinion, any of these planets (Ju, Ve, Mo) are> present in 7th then, bound in sadness waiting for the husband in distant> land could be the result.> > > > The above quote and meaning seems to be unique as Acharya Bhujabala> tells us that ascribing bad results to Benefics in 7th from MML is NOT> his opinion but of others. Bhujabala is of the opinion that benefics> like Ju, Ve, Mo in 7th of MML will give beneficial results.> > Good that we have found at least one acharya who speaks logically.> Actually Bhugabala is NOT alone â€" it is the opinion of ALL the> ancient sages! For example Brihat Daivajna Ranjana provides us the> following quote of Sage Atri â€"> > Yamitrago yadi bhavedusana budho va> > geervana natha sachivaH sitapaksha chandraH> > Kanya vivaha samaye subhamamananti> > Manv-atri-narada-vasishta-parasaradyaH> > (Sage Atri, Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)> > Meaning, if the 7th house from MML is occupied by any benefic planet> such as Venus, Mercury, Jupiter or Waning Moon then great ancient sages> like Manu, Atri, Narada, Vasishta and Parasara attributes good results> for the same (and NOT bad results).> > To emphasis this point, Rama Daivajna, the author of the great> text called Brihat Daivajna Ranjana quotes the following sloka as well> â€"> > Manu-Sandhilya-Mandhavya-Bharadvaj-Atri-GautamaH> > Yamitre tu prasamsantiH budhajeevosanaH subhaH> > (Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)> > Meaning, Sages like Manu, Sandhilya, Mandhavaya, Bharadvaja, Atri,> Gautama are all of the opinion that ‘If benefic planets are> present in 7th house from MML then benefic results should be predicted> (and NOT bad results)â€.> > Earlier in the quote given at the beginning of this article we saw> that, some unauthentic quotes by FAKE scholars tried to attribute the> owner ship of the wrong argument “Benefic in 7th from MML gives> bad results†to ancient and revered sages like Gautama, Garga> etc. But the authentic quote of Atri and the quotes provided by Brihat> Daivajna Ranjana reveal that it is not so; they clarify that almost all> the sages such as Atri, Manu, Mandhavya, Parasara etc including Gautama> is of the opinion that “Benefic in 7th from MML gives GOOD> resultsâ€. The available quotes of Garga too prompts us to think> that he too supports this opinion itself and not the first.> > I feel that the 2nd opinion is better, logical, and supported by> sages. The 1st opinion seems to be medieval origin and seems to depend> on some fake quotes.> > End Note> > · The hardest task in astrology learning is to differentiate> the worthy knowledge from the trash mount present.> > · The hardest task at our hand is to save this beautiful> knowledge branch astrology from the fake scholars; scholars who make> instant theories in an effort to earn name, fame and money. To save> astrology from the irresponsible fake masters who theorize without> sincerity as if astrology is like instant coffee â€" a use and> throw subject!> > · The hardest task for us is to unlearn the trash learned and> start again from the basics!> > > > Since I have already provided you with the seed of a controversy, I> stop here, expecting you all to take over. > > - 0 ->

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadh,

 

I think the important thing to clarify is benefic is natural benefic or

functional benefic...

 

With regards,

 

Sreeram_Srinivas

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreeram Srinivas,

As per my thinking no planet is benefic or malefic. He is benefic because he is functional benefic. He is malefic because he is functional malefic. We have to examine his association, aspect, position, lordship, occupation in nakshtra, his navamshesh and his dispositor. Only than we can say whethere the planet is benefic or malefic planet for the native.--- On Fri, 8/22/08, sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 wrote:

sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 Re: Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna Date: Friday, August 22, 2008, 7:22 PM

 

 

Dear Sreenadh,I think the important thing to clarify is benefic is natural benefic orfunctional benefic...With regards,Sreeram_Srinivas

[Guest guest]

Namaste Mr. Kurisja ji,

 

I have always been pondering to what extent it is correct to include

navamsa, navamsa dispositor, nakshatra, ashtakvarga,....muhurta

dasha....etc.., honestly feel it is making the muhurta more

complicated.....

 

To me the muhurta parameters are different......

 

With regards,

 

Sreeram_Srinivas

[Guest guest]

Dear Kursijaji,It is true that the overall effect of the planet is the most important thing to consider but a benefic planet is more like a kind mother-figure, who gives her children what they want and make them progress by the reward system. the malefic planet is more like a stern father-figure, who wants to make the children progress by scolding them if they are not upto the mark. But depending on situation a kind mother may also have to be stern and a stern father has also be kind. It may be somewhat like this if not exactly. A conception of benefic and malefic planet may help to have the proper understanding of the astrological forces. I agree that no planet is permanently friendly or permanently hostile as all planets are Lord Janardana himself as we say

"Graharupi Janardana".Regards,Sunil K. BhattacharjyaS.C. Kursija <sckursija Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 7:38:46 AM Re: Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta LagnaDear Sreeram Srinivas,As per my thinking no planet is benefic or malefic. He is benefic because he is functional benefic. He is malefic because he is functional malefic. We have to examine his association, aspect, position, lordship, occupation in nakshtra, his navamshesh and his dispositor. Only than we can say whethere the planet is benefic or malefic planet for the native.--- On Fri, 8/22/08, sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 (AT) sify (DOT) com> wrote:sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 (AT) sify (DOT) com>[ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagnaancient_indian_ astrologyFriday, August 22, 2008, 7:22 PMDear Sreenadh,I think the important thing to clarify is benefic is natural benefic orfunctional benefic...With regards,Sreeram_Srinivas

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

Interesting exactly today i was hardly trying to understand the

meaning of benefic and malefic in Jyotish. I agree that it is hard to

believe one planet is only good as benefic or completely evil as

malefic. I only wonder how much researches has one astrologer to do to

find all charts and all positions of a planet to consider it benefic

or malefic. I was also wondering if it is possible one planet to be

benefic in birth chart only and malefic in the other divisional

charts, how is it in conclusion? i also understand that each

divisional chart means an area of live...but it is still hard for me

to understand...

Anyway the example of Sunil ji as given below sounds nice []

Thank you.

Love and kind regards,

Liana

 

, Sunil Bhattacharjya

<sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

>

> Dear Kursijaji,

>

> It is true that the overall effect of the planet is the most

important thing to consider but a benefic planet is more like a kind

mother-figure, who gives her children what they want and make them

progress by the reward system. the malefic planet is more like a stern

father-figure, who wants to make the children progress by scolding

them if they are not upto the mark. But depending on situation a kind

mother may also have to be stern and a stern father has also be kind.

It may be somewhat like this if not exactly. A conception of benefic

and malefic planet may help to have the proper understanding of the

astrological forces. I agree that no planet is permanently friendly or

permanently hostile as all planets are Lord Janardana himself as we

say " Graharupi Janardana " .

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

>

>

>

>

> S.C. Kursija <sckursija

>

> Friday, August 22, 2008 7:38:46 AM

> Re: Planets in 7th of Marriage

Muhurta Lagna

>

>

> Dear Sreeram Srinivas,

> As per my thinking no planet is benefic or malefic. He is benefic

because he is functional benefic. He is malefic because he is

functional malefic. We have to examine his association, aspect,

position, lordship, occupation in nakshtra, his navamshesh and his

dispositor. Only than we can say whethere the planet is benefic or

malefic planet for the native.

>

> --- On Fri, 8/22/08, sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 (AT) sify (DOT) com> wrote:

>

> sreeram srinivas <sreeram64 (AT) sify (DOT) com>

> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Planets in 7th of Marriage

Muhurta Lagna

> ancient_indian_ astrology

> Friday, August 22, 2008, 7:22 PM

>

>

>

> Dear Sreenadh,

>

> I think the important thing to clarify is benefic is natural benefic or

> functional benefic...

>

> With regards,

>

> Sreeram_Srinivas

>

[Guest guest]

dear sreenadhji,

What was the prevailing marriagable age when the authors u have quoted have wirtten the slokas reg 7th from muhurtha lagna and chandra lagna shud be vacant. we are not sure whether child marriages were existing during that period. In addition what was the life span of an individual. 50years back if a man lives past 60 he is considered to be lucky because of poor medical facilities( i am referring to a person who doesnt involve himself in physical work even those days). These are the areas unanswered. Under what conditions these sages have written we arent sure.

B.v.Raman in his book Muhurtha says that the 7th from Muhrtha lagna shud not be occupied by malefics.

 

good wishes,

k.gopu

[Guest guest]

Dear Sunil ji,

Thanks.

//> In kerala major traditional view is (same as per Varaha Hora ) that

there shud b astamaya sudhi //

 

It is NOT the opinian of Varaha Hora, but of Vivaha patala assumed to

be written by Mihira.

Regards,

Sreenadh

 

 

, " sunil nair "

<astro_tellerkerala wrote:

>

>

>

>

> Hare rama krishna

>

> dear sreenadh ji

>

> Good article .

>

> In kerala major traditional view is (same as per Varaha Hora ) that

> there shud b astamaya sudhi ,means no planets shud b in 7th House .But

> there is no problem for the rasi Lords sitting in the house .

>

> Then all other parametrs apply .

>

> If some memebrs can post some muhurtha charts will some informations

we

> can see in comparison with above statements .

>

> It will b a good learning exprnce too

>

>

>

> regrds sunil nair

>

> om shreem mahalaxmai namah .

>

>

>

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> sreesog@ wrote:

> >

> >

> > Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna

> >

> >

> >

> > Marriage Muhurta Lagna †" here after denoted as MML

> >

> > Base Thoughts

> >

> > Today I was reading Muhurta Chintamani of Rama Daivajna; a text

> written

> > in Kashmir around AD 1600. This text on Muhurta is blessed with an

> > excellent Sanskrit commentry with the name Piyushadhara written by

Sri

> > Govinda Jyotirvid. Muhurta Chintamani with Piyushadhara commentry is

> an

> > excellent treasure on which a seeker of astrological knowledge can

> > meditate upon for years. [The same is true for Brihat Daivajna

Ranjana

> > written by Rama Daivajna as well. Other two texts of the same class

> are

> > Jyotir Nibanddha and Jaganmohana by Mukunda Daivajna Unfortunately I

> am

> > yet to have a copy of these two ancient excellent texts; But I know

> that

> > they are available.]

> >

> > The quote I went through today reads †"

> >

> > Jamitram dwividham proktam garga galava gautamaiH

> >

> > Tasmallagnacha chandracha Jamitram parivarjayet.

> >

> > Meaning, The ancient scholars Garga, Galava and Gautama say that 7th

> > house is of 2 type †" one, 7th from Lagna & 2nd, 7th house from

> > Moon. Because of this, planets in 7th (of MML) from both Lagna and

> Moon

> > should be avoided.

> >

> >

> >

> > First I thought a bit well about this quote due to the following

facts

> -

> >

> > · The quote refer to the name of some great sages viz. Garga,

> > Galava and Gautama

> >

> > · It provides us with a guideline such as ‘Any planet

> > in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should be avoided.

> >

> > But then on re-thought it revealed to me that it could be one of

those

> > misguiding quotes due to the following facts †"

> >

> > · Even though the above quote mentions the names of 3 ancient

> > sages, none of the available quotes by the above sages (E.g. Garga)

> > mention anything similar.

> >

> > · The quote it self is a father-less/auther-less quote; a

> > quote presented with the words ‘uktam cha’ (it is told

> > that); who tells this? Which sage? There is no info!

> >

> > · Too much importance to Muhurta is a Vedic and Medieval

> > concept rather than an Ancient Non-Vedic concept. (Astrology as we

> know

> > is an ancient non-vedic branch of knowledge)

> >

> > · Malefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna providing bad results is

> > an understandable possibility; well supported by the standard result

> > derivation concepts. But why Benefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna

should

> > provide bad results?! What is the logic behind? It seems totally

> absurd.

> >

> > I felt that I have encountered a misguiding quote, which pretends to

> be

> > authentic. If this is true, then certainly there is something to

study

> > and discuss in this quote. With these basic thoughts, I decided to

> spend

> > some time to analyze this concept of ‘Bad results attributed

to

> > ALL the planets from 7th of Muhurta Lagna’.

> >

> > Analyze

> >

> > The word ‘Jamitra’ indicate one who is

> > ‘friend from birth’ or the ‘soul mate’;

> the

> > compliment/soul mate to body (Lagna) and mind (Moon). This concept

of

> > ‘soul mate’ (The friend, pre-destined from birth

itself)

> > must have been pretty ancient concept as clear from the reference to

> the

> > ancient sages.

> >

> > Garga - Author of Garga Hora, Garga Samhita etc

> >

> > Galava - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of

> > this ancient sage

> >

> > Gautama - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of

> > this sage as well. Some believe that the name of Sage Kasyapa was

> > Gautama.

> >

> > This quote is curious not only because it refers to these ancient

> > sages, but also because it tell us that ‘Even as per the

> ancient

> > sages the presence of ANY planet (both benefic and malefic), in 7th

> from

> > Lagna or Moon is inauspicious (for a Marriage Muhurta)’!

> Malefic

> > in 7th considered as inauspicious is OK, but why benefic in 7th?! Is

> it

> > a mistake or an intentional misinterpretation? Is there a solid

logic

> > behind or as illogical as attributing too much importance to

Muhurtas?

> > To answer this, we would have to go through the ancient classic

quotes

> > available on this and clarify what they say. I started my search -

> >

> > In Support Of

> >

> > As per Madhaveeya †"

> >

> > If malefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then death of

> > husband results; If benefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna

then

> > separation results.

> >

> > As per Maheswara Acharya (from Muhurta Chintamani) -

> >

> > Lagnat seetakarat graha dyunagata neshta vivahe smrita (Maheswara

> > Acharya)

> >

> > Planets in 7th house from MML is NOT good.

> >

> > As per Vasishta Samhita -

> >

> > Sarve Jamitra Samsta Vidadhati Maranam (Vasishta Samhita)

> >

> > Any planet placed in 7th of Muhurta Lagna indicate untimely death.

> >

> > Please note that, available Vasishta Samhita is NOT an ancient text,

> and

> > follows Tropical Zodiac.

> >

> > As per Mihira(?) -

> >

> > Mihira in Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita elaborates the bad

> > results attributed to planets in 7th of MML as †"

> >

> > Sourara jeeva budha rahu raveendu sukraH

> >

> > kuryuH prasahya khalu saptama rasi samsthaH

> >

> > vaidhavya bandhana vadha kheya vittanasa-

> >

> > vyadhi pravasa maranani yadha kremena

> >

> > (from Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita)

> >

> > Meaning, the following results can be attributed to planets placed

in

> > 7th house of MML †"

> >

> > Saturn in 7th - Divorce/Death

> >

> > Mars in 7th - Imprisonment

> >

> > Jupiter in 7th - Murder/Death

> >

> > Rahu in 7th - Loss of money

> >

> > Sun in 7th - Disease

> >

> > Moon in 7th - Life abroad (away from wife)

> >

> > Venus in 7th - Death

> >

> > Many scholars think that Vivaha patala was added to Brihat Samhita

> > later and is NOT written by Mihira. In the above quote, apart from

> > general though “ANY planet in 7th house from MML indicate bad

> > resultsâ€, the above quote seems to over-state the results.

> > Definitely the simple Muhurta CANNOT has this much important

influence

> > on future results. If the native’s chart indicates longevity,

> > then simply because at the time of marriage the 7th house from lagna

> was

> > occupied by Venus or so, predicting that he will have an untimely

> death

> > is simply illogical. Attributing deadly strong results such as death

> to

> > Muhurtas selected for simple events is nothing but an insult to true

> and

> > sincere astrology. This nasty emphasis on strong results from simple

> > general combinations and events is what makes astrology a trash

mount

> > with rare gems only.

> >

> > In general the texts and acharyas who support this ‘Extra

> > importance to Muhurta’ seems to be of Medieval or Vedic

origin.

> > The same seems to be true for the concept ‘All planets gives

> bad

> > results in 7th of MML’ as well. The people who support this

> > theory are Madhavacharya, Chandeswara, Mihira(?),Vasista Samhita

> author

> > etc. The texts Madhaveeya, Prashna Chandeswara, Vivaha Patala,

> Vasishta

> > Samhita etc are all of medieval origin.

> >

> > This may not be the opinion of real ancient sages; this may not be

the

> > opinion of even the Garga, Galava and Gautama our original quote was

> > referring. But how to prove this? How to prove that original logical

> > opinion was that “Malefics in 7th of MML is Bad; and Benefics

> in

> > 7th of MML is GOOD� Of course we would have to provide some

> > evidence †" some sage quotes that mention exactly the same. Are

> > such quotes available? Did the true ancient astrology able to

survive

> > the thunderstorm caused by the FAKE Muhurta theorists and specialist

> > (most of whom are of vedic and tropical astrological followers and

> > Brahmins)? Yes! In the next section, I will try provide some such

> > quotes.

> >

> > Against

> >

> > Let us start from a quote of ancient scholar Bhujabala, provided

> > in Muhurta Chintamani.

> >

> > Chandrat Saptama Rasige dinakare tyekta dhanaiH kanyaka

> >

> > Bhoume cha pramada prayati vilayam saurena vandhya saruk

> >

> > JeevaH sukra sasankajau subhakaraH kechidvadanti kramat-

> >

> > Bhartrir prepsita deekshitastabhavane nityam pravasanvita.

> >

> > (BujabalaH, Muhurta Chintamani)

> >

> > Meaning, if the 7th house from Moon sign at the time of marriage

> Muhurta

> > is occupied by planets then the following results can be predicted

> > †"

> >

> > Sun †" loss of money to wife

> >

> > Mars †" death/loss of wife

> >

> > Saturn †" impotency to wife/disease

> >

> > Jupiter, Venus, Moon †" gives good results.

> >

> > But as per others opinion, any of these planets (Ju, Ve, Mo) are

> > present in 7th then, bound in sadness waiting for the husband in

> distant

> > land could be the result.

> >

> >

> >

> > The above quote and meaning seems to be unique as Acharya Bhujabala

> > tells us that ascribing bad results to Benefics in 7th from MML is

NOT

> > his opinion but of others. Bhujabala is of the opinion that benefics

> > like Ju, Ve, Mo in 7th of MML will give beneficial results.

> >

> > Good that we have found at least one acharya who speaks logically.

> > Actually Bhugabala is NOT alone †" it is the opinion of ALL the

> > ancient sages! For example Brihat Daivajna Ranjana provides us the

> > following quote of Sage Atri †"

> >

> > Yamitrago yadi bhavedusana budho va

> >

> > geervana natha sachivaH sitapaksha chandraH

> >

> > Kanya vivaha samaye subhamamananti

> >

> > Manv-atri-narada-vasishta-parasaradyaH

> >

> > (Sage Atri, Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)

> >

> > Meaning, if the 7th house from MML is occupied by any benefic planet

> > such as Venus, Mercury, Jupiter or Waning Moon then great ancient

> sages

> > like Manu, Atri, Narada, Vasishta and Parasara attributes good

results

> > for the same (and NOT bad results).

> >

> > To emphasis this point, Rama Daivajna, the author of the great

> > text called Brihat Daivajna Ranjana quotes the following sloka as

well

> > †"

> >

> > Manu-Sandhilya-Mandhavya-Bharadvaj-Atri-GautamaH

> >

> > Yamitre tu prasamsantiH budhajeevosanaH subhaH

> >

> > (Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)

> >

> > Meaning, Sages like Manu, Sandhilya, Mandhavaya, Bharadvaja, Atri,

> > Gautama are all of the opinion that ‘If benefic planets are

> > present in 7th house from MML then benefic results should be

predicted

> > (and NOT bad results)â€.

> >

> > Earlier in the quote given at the beginning of this article we saw

> > that, some unauthentic quotes by FAKE scholars tried to attribute

the

> > owner ship of the wrong argument “Benefic in 7th from MML

gives

> > bad results†to ancient and revered sages like Gautama, Garga

> > etc. But the authentic quote of Atri and the quotes provided by

Brihat

> > Daivajna Ranjana reveal that it is not so; they clarify that almost

> all

> > the sages such as Atri, Manu, Mandhavya, Parasara etc including

> Gautama

> > is of the opinion that “Benefic in 7th from MML gives GOOD

> > resultsâ€. The available quotes of Garga too prompts us to

think

> > that he too supports this opinion itself and not the first.

> >

> > I feel that the 2nd opinion is better, logical, and supported by

> > sages. The 1st opinion seems to be medieval origin and seems to

depend

> > on some fake quotes.

> >

> > End Note

> >

> > · The hardest task in astrology learning is to differentiate

> > the worthy knowledge from the trash mount present.

> >

> > · The hardest task at our hand is to save this beautiful

> > knowledge branch astrology from the fake scholars; scholars who make

> > instant theories in an effort to earn name, fame and money. To save

> > astrology from the irresponsible fake masters who theorize without

> > sincerity as if astrology is like instant coffee †" a use and

> > throw subject!

> >

> > · The hardest task for us is to unlearn the trash learned and

> > start again from the basics!

> >

> >

> >

> > Since I have already provided you with the seed of a controversy, I

> > stop here, expecting you all to take over.

> >

> > - 0 -

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinivas ji,

In such quotes the word 'benefic' usually refers to 'natural

benefic' and NOT to functional benefic.

Regards,

Sreenadh

 

, " sreeram srinivas "

<sreeram64 wrote:

>

>

> Dear Sreenadh,

>

> I think the important thing to clarify is benefic is natural

benefic or

> functional benefic...

>

> With regards,

>

> Sreeram_Srinivas

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Members,

 

It is possible for a planet(s) in 7H could be malefic or benefic to

either of bride or bridegroom. It may for this reason, it is preferred

to have NO planets in 7H.

 

With regards,

 

Sreeram_Srinivas

[Guest guest]

Dear Gopu ji, //> What was the prevailing marriageable age when the authors u have quoted have wirtten the slokas reg 7th from muhurtha lagna and chandra lagna shud be vacant.// How do you thinks both these things (i.e. marriagable age and planets in 7th) relats each other?!! I wonder- I don't see any relation between the two. Any to anwer your question regarding the age considered as marriageable by these sages, I would have to do some research, trying to find quotes that refer to the same. (Which I don't think as worthy enough as of now - but will try to do if time permits). But if you are speaking about comprehensible medieval periods like 15th/16th century, during that period many texts and authors considered that male should be at least trice age than that of female (which points to the fact that child marriages was present during that period). But after this period things changed - even though not at the same everywhere. If the question is regarding the non-vedic ancient past of the sages, then even the marriage matching concept was NOT present during that period - yes, neither among the Vedic people nor among the non-vedic people. If you ask, whether they checked for Muhurtas for marriage during that period, then the answer would be - yes, they did. Actually that is exactly the reason why we find these quotes. (What was that period? - I don't know!) //In addition what was the life span of an individual. 50years back if a man lives past 60 he is considered to be lucky because of poor medical facilities// Regarding the period of 50 years back, you might be right - but not regarding before 10th century or better much before that during BC period; during the golden period of India's past. If you refer to epics like Mahabharata and Puranas you may find that in many dynasty lists the average ruling span given to many kings is 60-80 years! This points to the fact that longevity was better during that period - possibly because of unpolluted air, nature and healthy living conditions. Yes, a natural possibility! Please note that the life style of people who lived in Sindhu-Saraswati must have been much better than the dust inhaling living conditions in the modern(?) day Indian capital 'Delhi' :=) an assumed 'cultured/developed' (?) state (?!). Hope this clarifies. //Under what conditions these sages have written we arent sure.// Of course you can collect their quote, study and answer. It would be a good research area for you. Yes, we need to find the answers, and questions should help 'own' research. We hope to see some study and clarification from your side on this regard. //> B.v.Raman in his book Muhurtha says that the 7th from Muhrtha lagna should not be occupied by malefics.// He was just reflecting the opinion of some medieval scholars, just depending on the easily available material. There neither anything new in his opinion, nor any real hard work/research/thought. It is an opinion anyone can say without any thinking, because that is heard everywhere; and it is the very reason for the unworthiness of that opinion. Had he ever thought of it – he at least would had provided, the logic behind considering `benefic in 7th of MML as bad'; but he never even thought of it, and so nothing worthy came out. The above statement of Raman DOES NOT carry any weight or original thought. I have a good regard for Raman, but sorry to say - such things remains a fact. Love and regards,Sreenadh , K Gopu <kgopu_24 wrote:>> dear sreenadhji,> What was the prevailing marriagable age when the authors u have quoted have wirtten the slokas reg 7th from muhurtha lagna and chandra lagna shud be vacant. we are not sure whether child marriages were existing during that period. In addition what was the life span of an individual. 50years back if a man lives past 60 he is considered to be lucky because of poor medical facilities( i am referring to a person who doesnt involve himself in physical work even those days). These are the areas unanswered. Under what conditions these sages have written we arent sure.> B.v.Raman in his book Muhurtha says that the 7th from Muhrtha lagna shud not be occupied by malefics.>  > good wishes,> k.gopu> > > > > --- On Fri, 8/22/08, Sreenadh sreesog wrote:> > Sreenadh sreesog Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna> > Friday, August 22, 2008, 6:15 PM> > > > > > > > Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna>  > Marriage Muhurta Lagna â€" here after denoted as MML> Base Thoughts> Today I was reading Muhurta Chintamani of Rama Daivajna; a text written in Kashmir around AD 1600. This text on Muhurta is blessed with an excellent Sanskrit commentry with the name Piyushadhara written by Sri Govinda Jyotirvid. Muhurta Chintamani with Piyushadhara commentry is an excellent treasure on which a seeker of astrological knowledge can meditate upon for years. [The same is true for Brihat Daivajna Ranjana written by Rama Daivajna as well. Other two texts of the same class are Jyotir Nibanddha and Jaganmohana by Mukunda Daivajna Unfortunately I am yet to have a copy of these two ancient excellent texts; But I know that they are available.]>            The quote I went through today reads â€"> Jamitram dwividham proktam garga galava gautamaiH> Tasmallagnacha chandracha Jamitram parivarjayet.> Meaning, The ancient scholars Garga, Galava and Gautama say that 7th house is of 2 type â€" one, 7th from Lagna & 2nd, 7th house from Moon. Because of this, planets in 7th (of MML) from both Lagna and Moon should be avoided.>  > First I thought a bit well about this quote due to the following facts - > ·       The quote refer to the name of some great sages viz. Garga, Galava and Gautama> ·       It provides us with a guideline such as ‘Any planet in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should be avoided.> But then on re-thought it revealed to me that it could be one of those misguiding quotes due to the following facts â€"> ·       Even though the above quote mentions the names of 3 ancient sages, none of the available quotes by the above sages (E.g. Garga) mention anything similar.> ·       The quote it self is a father-less/ auther-less quote; a quote presented with the words ‘uktam cha’ (it is told that); who tells this? Which sage? There is no info!> ·       Too much importance to Muhurta is a Vedic and Medieval concept rather than an Ancient Non-Vedic concept. (Astrology as we know is an ancient non-vedic branch of knowledge)> ·       Malefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna providing bad results is an understandable possibility; well supported by the standard result derivation concepts. But why Benefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should provide bad results?! What is the logic behind? It seems totally absurd.> I felt that I have encountered a misguiding quote, which pretends to be authentic. If this is true, then certainly there is something to study and discuss in this quote. With these basic thoughts, I decided to spend some time to analyze this concept of ‘Bad results attributed to ALL the planets from 7th of Muhurta Lagna’.> Analyze>      The word ‘Jamitra’ indicate one who is ‘friend from birth’ or the ‘soul mate’; the compliment/soul mate to body (Lagna) and mind (Moon). This concept of ‘soul mate’ (The friend, pre-destined from birth itself) must have been pretty ancient concept as clear from the reference to the ancient sages.> Garga     - Author of Garga Hora, Garga Samhita etc> Galava      - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of this ancient sage> Gautama      - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of this sage as well. Some believe that the name of Sage Kasyapa was Gautama.>      This quote is curious not only because it refers to these ancient sages, but also because it tell us that ‘Even as per the ancient sages the presence of ANY planet (both benefic and malefic), in 7th from Lagna or Moon is inauspicious (for a Marriage Muhurta)’! Malefic in 7th considered as inauspicious is OK, but why benefic in 7th?! Is it a mistake or an intentional misinterpretation? Is there a solid logic behind or as illogical as attributing too much importance to Muhurtas? To answer this, we would have to go through the ancient classic quotes available on this and clarify what they say. I started my search -> In Support Of> As per Madhaveeya â€">      If malefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then death of husband results; If benefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then separation results.> As per Maheswara Acharya (from Muhurta Chintamani) ->      Lagnat seetakarat graha dyunagata neshta vivahe smrita (Maheswara Acharya)>      Planets in 7th house from MML is NOT good.> As per Vasishta Samhita ->      Sarve Jamitra Samsta Vidadhati Maranam (Vasishta Samhita)>      Any planet placed in 7th of Muhurta Lagna indicate untimely death.> Please note that, available Vasishta Samhita is NOT an ancient text, and follows Tropical Zodiac.> As per Mihira(?) ->      Mihira in Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita elaborates the bad results attributed to planets in 7th of MML as â€">      Sourara jeeva budha rahu raveendu sukraH>      kuryuH prasahya khalu saptama rasi samsthaH>      vaidhavya bandhana vadha kheya vittanasa->      vyadhi pravasa maranani yadha kremena>                       (from Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita)> Meaning, the following results can be attributed to planets placed in 7th house of MML â€">      Saturn in 7th      - Divorce/Death>      Mars in 7th - Imprisonment>      Jupiter in 7th     - Murder/Death>      Rahu in 7th - Loss of money>      Sun in 7th - Disease>      Moon in 7th     - Life abroad (away from wife)>      Venus in 7th     - Death>      Many scholars think that Vivaha patala was added to Brihat Samhita later and is NOT written by Mihira. In the above quote, apart from general though â€Å"ANY planet in 7th house from MML indicate bad results�, the above quote seems to over-state the results. Definitely the simple Muhurta CANNOT has this much important influence on future results. If the native’s chart indicates longevity, then simply because at the time of marriage the 7th house from lagna was occupied by Venus or so, predicting that he will have an untimely death is simply illogical. Attributing deadly strong results such as death to Muhurtas selected for simple events is nothing but an insult to true and sincere astrology. This nasty emphasis on strong results from simple general combinations and events is what makes astrology a trash mount with rare gems only.>      In general the texts and acharyas who support this ‘Extra importance to Muhurta’ seems to be of Medieval or Vedic origin. The same seems to be true for the concept â€˜All planets gives bad results in 7th of MML’ as well. The people who support this theory are Madhavacharya, Chandeswara, Mihira(?),Vasista Samhita author etc. The texts Madhaveeya, Prashna Chandeswara, Vivaha Patala, Vasishta Samhita etc are all of medieval origin.> This may not be the opinion of real ancient sages; this may not be the opinion of even the Garga, Galava and Gautama our original quote was referring. But how to prove this? How to prove that original logical opinion was that â€Å"Malefics in 7th of MML is Bad; and Benefics in 7th of MML is GOOD�? Of course we would have to provide some evidence â€" some sage quotes that mention exactly the same. Are such quotes available? Did the true ancient astrology able to survive the thunderstorm caused by the FAKE Muhurta theorists and specialist (most of whom are of vedic and tropical astrological followers and Brahmins)? Yes! In the next section, I will try provide some such quotes.> Against>      Let us start from a quote of ancient scholar Bhujabala, provided in Muhurta Chintamani.>      Chandrat Saptama Rasige dinakare tyekta dhanaiH kanyaka>      Bhoume cha pramada prayati vilayam saurena vandhya saruk>      JeevaH sukra sasankajau subhakaraH kechidvadanti kramat->      Bhartrir prepsita deekshitastabhavane nityam pravasanvita.>  (BujabalaH, Muhurta Chintamani)> Meaning, if the 7th house from Moon sign at the time of marriage Muhurta is occupied by planets then the following results can be predicted â€">      Sun â€" loss of money to wife> Mars â€" death/loss of wife> Saturn â€" impotency to wife/disease> Jupiter, Venus, Moon â€" gives good results.> But as per others opinion, any of these planets (Ju, Ve, Mo) are present in 7th then, bound in sadness waiting for the husband in distant land could be the result.>  > The above quote and meaning seems to be unique as Acharya Bhujabala tells us that ascribing bad results to Benefics in 7th from MML is NOT his opinion but of others. Bhujabala is of the opinion that benefics like Ju, Ve, Mo in 7th of MML will give beneficial results.>      Good that we have found at least one acharya who speaks logically. Actually Bhugabala is NOT alone â€" it is the opinion of ALL the ancient sages! For example Brihat Daivajna Ranjana provides us the following quote of Sage Atri â€"> Yamitrago yadi bhavedusana budho va> geervana natha sachivaH sitapaksha chandraH>      Kanya vivaha samaye subhamamananti>      Manv-atri-narada- vasishta- parasaradyaH> (Sage Atri, Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)> Meaning, if the 7th house from MML is occupied by any benefic planet such as Venus, Mercury, Jupiter or Waning Moon then great ancient sages like Manu, Atri, Narada, Vasishta and Parasara attributes good results for the same (and NOT bad results).>      To emphasis this point, Rama Daivajna, the author of the great text called Brihat Daivajna Ranjana quotes the following sloka as well â€"> Manu-Sandhilya- Mandhavya- Bharadvaj- Atri-GautamaH>      Yamitre tu prasamsantiH budhajeevosanaH subhaH> (Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)> Meaning, Sages like Manu, Sandhilya, Mandhavaya, Bharadvaja, Atri, Gautama are all of the opinion that ‘If benefic planets are present in 7th house from MML then benefic results should be predicted (and NOT bad results)�.>      Earlier in the quote given at the beginning of this article we saw that, some unauthentic quotes by FAKE scholars tried to attribute the owner ship of the wrong argument â€Å"Benefic in 7th from MML gives bad results� to ancient and revered sages like Gautama, Garga etc. But the authentic quote of Atri and the quotes provided by Brihat Daivajna Ranjana reveal that it is not so; they clarify that almost all the sages such as Atri, Manu, Mandhavya, Parasara etc including Gautama is of the opinion that â€Å"Benefic in 7th from MML gives GOOD results�. The available quotes of Garga too prompts us to think that he too supports this opinion itself and not the first.>      I feel that the 2nd opinion is better, logical, and supported by sages. The 1st opinion seems to be medieval origin and seems to depend on some fake quotes.> End Note> ·       The hardest task in astrology learning is to differentiate the worthy knowledge from the trash mount present.> ·       The hardest task at our hand is to save this beautiful knowledge branch astrology from the fake scholars; scholars who make instant theories in an effort to earn name, fame and money. To save astrology from the irresponsible fake masters who theorize without sincerity as if astrology is like instant coffee â€" a use and throw subject!> ·       The hardest task for us is to unlearn the trash learned and start again from the basics!>  > Since I have  already provided you with the seed of a controversy, I stop here, expecting you all to take over. > - 0 ->

[Guest guest]

dear sreenadhji,

thanks for replying point by point.

My thinking was that the life span of natives must have been short compared to today's life span and in addition prevalance of child marriages would have prompted these sages to rule out any planets even if they are benefic to be outside the purview of the 7th house from marriage muhurtha lagn, so that marriage doesnt bring in early death either to the wife or husband.

this is just my presumption.

 

 

good wishes,

k.gopu

--- On Sat, 8/23/08, Sreenadh <sreesog wrote:

Sreenadh <sreesog Re: Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna Date: Saturday, August 23, 2008, 7:29 PM

 

 

 

Dear Gopu ji, //> What was the prevailing marriageable age when the authors u have quoted have wirtten the slokas reg 7th from muhurtha lagna and chandra lagna shud be vacant.// How do you thinks both these things (i.e. marriagable age and planets in 7th) relats each other?!! I wonder- I don't see any relation between the two. Any to anwer your question regarding the age considered as marriageable by these sages, I would have to do some research, trying to find quotes that refer to the same. (Which I don't think as worthy enough as of now - but will try to do if time permits). But if you are speaking about comprehensible medieval periods like 15th/16th century, during that period many texts and authors considered that male should be at least trice age than that of female (which points to the fact that child marriages was present during

that period). But after this period things changed - even though not at the same everywhere. If the question is regarding the non-vedic ancient past of the sages, then even the marriage matching concept was NOT present during that period - yes, neither among the Vedic people nor among the non-vedic people. If you ask, whether they checked for Muhurtas for marriage during that period, then the answer would be - yes, they did. Actually that is exactly the reason why we find these quotes. (What was that period? - I don't know!) //In addition what was the life span of an individual. 50years back if a man lives past 60 he is considered to be lucky because of poor medical facilities// Regarding the period of 50 years back, you might be right - but not regarding before 10th century or better much before that during BC period; during the golden period of India's past. If you refer to epics like Mahabharata and

Puranas you may find that in many dynasty lists the average ruling span given to many kings is 60-80 years! This points to the fact that longevity was better during that period - possibly because of unpolluted air, nature and healthy living conditions. Yes, a natural possibility! Please note that the life style of people who lived in Sindhu-Saraswati must have been much better than the dust inhaling living conditions in the modern(?) day Indian capital 'Delhi' :=) an assumed 'cultured/developed ' (?) state (?!). Hope this clarifies. //Under what conditions these sages have written we arent sure.// Of course you can collect their quote, study and answer. It would be a good research area for you. Yes, we need to find the answers, and questions should help 'own' research. We hope to see some study and clarification from your side on this regard. //> B.v.Raman in his book Muhurtha says that the 7th from Muhrtha

lagna should not be occupied by malefics.// He was just reflecting the opinion of some medieval scholars, just depending on the easily available material. There neither anything new in his opinion, nor any real hard work/research/ thought. It is an opinion anyone can say without any thinking, because that is heard everywhere; and it is the very reason for the unworthiness of that opinion. Had he ever thought of it – he at least would had provided, the logic behind considering `benefic in 7th of MML as bad'; but he never even thought of it, and so nothing worthy came out. The above statement of Raman DOES NOT carry any weight or original thought. I have a good regard for Raman, but sorry to say - such things remains a fact. Love and regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, K Gopu <kgopu_24 wrote:>> dear

sreenadhji,> What was the prevailing marriagable age when the authors u have quoted have wirtten the slokas reg 7th from muhurtha lagna and chandra lagna shud be vacant. we are not sure whether child marriages were existing during that period. In addition what was the life span of an individual. 50years back if a man lives past 60 he is considered to be lucky because of poor medical facilities( i am referring to a person who doesnt involve himself in physical work even those days). These are the areas unanswered. Under what conditions these sages have written we arent sure.> B.v.Raman in his book Muhurtha says that the 7th from Muhrtha lagna shud not be occupied by malefics.> Â > good wishes,> k.gopu> > > > > --- On Fri, 8/22/08, Sreenadh sreesog wrote:> > Sreenadh sreesog [ancient_indian_ astrology] Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta

Lagna> ancient_indian_ astrology> Friday, August 22, 2008, 6:15 PM> > > > > > > > Planets in 7th of Marriage Muhurta Lagna>  > Marriage Muhurta Lagna â€" here after denoted as MML> Base Thoughts> Today I was reading Muhurta Chintamani of Rama Daivajna; a text written in Kashmir around AD 1600. This text on Muhurta is blessed with an excellent Sanskrit commentry with the name Piyushadhara written by Sri Govinda Jyotirvid. Muhurta Chintamani with Piyushadhara commentry is an excellent treasure on which a seeker of astrological knowledge can meditate upon for years. [The same is true for Brihat Daivajna Ranjana written by Rama Daivajna as well. Other two texts of the same class are Jyotir Nibanddha and Jaganmohana by Mukunda Daivajna Unfortunately I am yet to have a copy of these two ancient excellent texts; But I

know that they are available.]>            The quote I went through today reads â€"> Jamitram dwividham proktam garga galava gautamaiH> Tasmallagnacha chandracha Jamitram parivarjayet.> Meaning, The ancient scholars Garga, Galava and Gautama say that 7th house is of 2 type â€" one, 7th from Lagna & 2nd, 7th house from Moon. Because of this, planets in 7th (of MML) from both Lagna and Moon should be avoided.>  > First I thought a bit well about this quote due to the following facts - > ·       The quote refer to the name of some great sages viz. Garga, Galava and Gautama> ·       It provides us with a guideline such as ‘Any planet in 7th from Muhurta Lagna

should be avoided.> But then on re-thought it revealed to me that it could be one of those misguiding quotes due to the following facts â€"> ·       Even though the above quote mentions the names of 3 ancient sages, none of the available quotes by the above sages (E.g. Garga) mention anything similar.> ·       The quote it self is a father-less/ auther-less quote; a quote presented with the words ‘uktam cha’ (it is told that); who tells this? Which sage? There is no info!> ·       Too much importance to Muhurta is a Vedic and Medieval concept rather than an Ancient Non-Vedic concept. (Astrology as we know is an ancient non-vedic branch of knowledge)>

·       Malefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna providing bad results is an understandable possibility; well supported by the standard result derivation concepts. But why Benefic in 7th from Muhurta Lagna should provide bad results?! What is the logic behind? It seems totally absurd.> I felt that I have encountered a misguiding quote, which pretends to be authentic. If this is true, then certainly there is something to study and discuss in this quote. With these basic thoughts, I decided to spend some time to analyze this concept of ‘Bad results attributed to ALL the planets from 7th of Muhurta Lagna’.> Analyze>      The word ‘Jamitra’ indicate one who is ‘friend from birth’ or the ‘soul mate’; the compliment/soul mate to

body (Lagna) and mind (Moon). This concept of ‘soul mate’ (The friend, pre-destined from birth itself) must have been pretty ancient concept as clear from the reference to the ancient sages.> Garga     - Author of Garga Hora, Garga Samhita etc> Galava      - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of this ancient sage> Gautama      - Not much is known about the astrological contribution of this sage as well. Some believe that the name of Sage Kasyapa was Gautama.>      This quote is curious not only because it refers to these ancient sages, but also because it tell us that ‘Even as per the ancient sages the presence of ANY planet (both benefic and malefic), in 7th from Lagna or Moon is inauspicious (for a Marriage

Muhurta)’! Malefic in 7th considered as inauspicious is OK, but why benefic in 7th?! Is it a mistake or an intentional misinterpretation? Is there a solid logic behind or as illogical as attributing too much importance to Muhurtas? To answer this, we would have to go through the ancient classic quotes available on this and clarify what they say. I started my search -> In Support Of> As per Madhaveeya â€">      If malefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then death of husband results; If benefic is present in 7th from Muhurta Lagna then separation results.> As per Maheswara Acharya (from Muhurta Chintamani) ->      Lagnat seetakarat graha dyunagata neshta vivahe smrita (Maheswara Acharya)>      Planets in 7th house from MML is NOT good.> As per Vasishta

Samhita ->      Sarve Jamitra Samsta Vidadhati Maranam (Vasishta Samhita)>      Any planet placed in 7th of Muhurta Lagna indicate untimely death.> Please note that, available Vasishta Samhita is NOT an ancient text, and follows Tropical Zodiac.> As per Mihira(?) ->      Mihira in Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita elaborates the bad results attributed to planets in 7th of MML as â€">      Sourara jeeva budha rahu raveendu sukraH>      kuryuH prasahya khalu saptama rasi samsthaH>      vaidhavya bandhana vadha kheya vittanasa->      vyadhi pravasa maranani yadha kremena>

                      (from Vivaha patala of Brihat Samhita)> Meaning, the following results can be attributed to planets placed in 7th house of MML â€">      Saturn in 7th      - Divorce/Death>      Mars in 7th - Imprisonment>      Jupiter in 7th     - Murder/Death>      Rahu in 7th - Loss of money>      Sun in 7th - Disease>      Moon in 7th     - Life abroad (away from wife)>

     Venus in 7th     - Death>      Many scholars think that Vivaha patala was added to Brihat Samhita later and is NOT written by Mihira. In the above quote, apart from general though â€Å"ANY planet in 7th house from MML indicate bad results�, the above quote seems to over-state the results. Definitely the simple Muhurta CANNOT has this much important influence on future results. If the native’s chart indicates longevity, then simply because at the time of marriage the 7th house from lagna was occupied by Venus or so, predicting that he will have an untimely death is simply illogical. Attributing deadly strong results such as death to Muhurtas selected for simple events is nothing but an insult to true and sincere astrology. This nasty emphasis on strong results from simple general combinations

and events is what makes astrology a trash mount with rare gems only.>      In general the texts and acharyas who support this ‘Extra importance to Muhurta’ seems to be of Medieval or Vedic origin. The same seems to be true for the concept â€˜All planets gives bad results in 7th of MML’ as well. The people who support this theory are Madhavacharya, Chandeswara, Mihira(?),Vasista Samhita author etc. The texts Madhaveeya, Prashna Chandeswara, Vivaha Patala, Vasishta Samhita etc are all of medieval origin.> This may not be the opinion of real ancient sages; this may not be the opinion of even the Garga, Galava and Gautama our original quote was referring. But how to prove this? How to prove that original logical opinion was that â€Å"Malefics in 7th of MML is Bad; and Benefics in 7th of MML is GOOD�? Of course we

would have to provide some evidence â€" some sage quotes that mention exactly the same. Are such quotes available? Did the true ancient astrology able to survive the thunderstorm caused by the FAKE Muhurta theorists and specialist (most of whom are of vedic and tropical astrological followers and Brahmins)? Yes! In the next section, I will try provide some such quotes.> Against>      Let us start from a quote of ancient scholar Bhujabala, provided in Muhurta Chintamani.>      Chandrat Saptama Rasige dinakare tyekta dhanaiH kanyaka>      Bhoume cha pramada prayati vilayam saurena vandhya saruk>      JeevaH sukra sasankajau subhakaraH kechidvadanti kramat->      Bhartrir prepsita deekshitastabhavane nityam

pravasanvita.>  (BujabalaH, Muhurta Chintamani)> Meaning, if the 7th house from Moon sign at the time of marriage Muhurta is occupied by planets then the following results can be predicted â€">      Sun â€" loss of money to wife> Mars â€" death/loss of wife> Saturn â€" impotency to wife/disease> Jupiter, Venus, Moon â€" gives good results.> But as per others opinion, any of these planets (Ju, Ve, Mo) are present in 7th then, bound in sadness waiting for the husband in distant land could be the result.>  > The above quote and meaning seems to be unique as Acharya Bhujabala tells us that ascribing bad results to Benefics in 7th from MML is NOT his opinion but of others. Bhujabala is of the opinion that benefics like Ju, Ve, Mo in 7th of MML will give beneficial results.>

     Good that we have found at least one acharya who speaks logically. Actually Bhugabala is NOT alone â€" it is the opinion of ALL the ancient sages! For example Brihat Daivajna Ranjana provides us the following quote of Sage Atri â€"> Yamitrago yadi bhavedusana budho va> geervana natha sachivaH sitapaksha chandraH>      Kanya vivaha samaye subhamamananti>      Manv-atri-narada- vasishta- parasaradyaH> (Sage Atri, Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)> Meaning, if the 7th house from MML is occupied by any benefic planet such as Venus, Mercury, Jupiter or Waning Moon then great ancient sages like Manu, Atri, Narada, Vasishta and Parasara attributes good results for the same (and NOT bad results).>      To emphasis this point, Rama Daivajna, the

author of the great text called Brihat Daivajna Ranjana quotes the following sloka as well â€"> Manu-Sandhilya- Mandhavya- Bharadvaj- Atri-GautamaH>      Yamitre tu prasamsantiH budhajeevosanaH subhaH> (Brihat Daivajna Ranjana)> Meaning, Sages like Manu, Sandhilya, Mandhavaya, Bharadvaja, Atri, Gautama are all of the opinion that ‘If benefic planets are present in 7th house from MML then benefic results should be predicted (and NOT bad results)�.>      Earlier in the quote given at the beginning of this article we saw that, some unauthentic quotes by FAKE scholars tried to attribute the owner ship of the wrong argument â€Å"Benefic in 7th from MML gives bad results� to ancient and revered sages like Gautama, Garga etc. But the authentic quote of Atri and the quotes provided by Brihat

Daivajna Ranjana reveal that it is not so; they clarify that almost all the sages such as Atri, Manu, Mandhavya, Parasara etc including Gautama is of the opinion that â€Å"Benefic in 7th from MML gives GOOD results�. The available quotes of Garga too prompts us to think that he too supports this opinion itself and not the first.>      I feel that the 2nd opinion is better, logical, and supported by sages. The 1st opinion seems to be medieval origin and seems to depend on some fake quotes.> End Note> ·       The hardest task in astrology learning is to differentiate the worthy knowledge from the trash mount present.> ·       The hardest task at our hand is to save this beautiful knowledge branch astrology from the fake scholars; scholars who make

instant theories in an effort to earn name, fame and money. To save astrology from the irresponsible fake masters who theorize without sincerity as if astrology is like instant coffee â€" a use and throw subject!> ·       The hardest task for us is to unlearn the trash learned and start again from the basics!>  > Since I have  already provided you with the seed of a controversy, I stop here, expecting you all to take over. > - 0 ->

[Guest guest]

Hare rama krishna

dear gopu ji and sreenadh ji

 

Muhurtha is fixed as stree pradhana ( means giving importance to ladies ) but make sure that they follow traditions too.so i think 7th House becomes the house of husband and benefics may tone down him and may b a sort of submissive nature may devlp within marriage and malefic may show up agreessive nature .so rishis dont want this to happen in marriage life and wat they were aiming was harmony ,so it is better if we dont hav any planets in 7th ,other than owner of those houses .

 

This is my view only .And it may b wrong too

 

regrds sunil nair

om shreem mahalaxmai namah

, K Gopu <kgopu_24 wrote:>> dear sreenadhji,> thanks for replying point by point.> My thinking was that the life span of natives must have been short compared to today's life span and in addition prevalance of child marriages would have prompted these sages to rule out any planets even if they are benefic to be outside the purview of the 7th house from marriage muhurtha lagn, so that marriage doesnt bring in early death either to the wife or husband.> this is just my presumption.> > > good wishes,> k.gopu>

[Guest guest]

dear sunil nairji,

thanks for the explanation. it was quite apt.

 

regards,

k.gopu