Application of Amsas (Divisions)

October 11, 2009

Dear Srinadh Ji,

Are you not putting in another words the assessment of strength and intrisic

quality of a planet by being placed at a certain area within a sign, this is

what, i have been saying since very first mail on D charts, every body who

thought over implications of D charts, w'd say same.

What's new in that, What is the research in it ?

regards,

Utkal.

, " sreesog " <sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Neelam ji,

> //One has to see how different amshkas are placed from lagna amsha.//

> No - we don't have to! This itself is the idea not supported and not

> dealt with by the ancient asto classics. The point is relative distance

> of other amsas from lagnamsa is IRRELEVANT. Please try to grasp this

> point, and understand absurdity of D-charts.

> I will try to explain with an example -

> Think that Sun is in Aries first navamsa (Thus, Sun navamsaka falls in

> Aries itself) and Saturn in Libra 9th navamsa (Thus Saturn navamsaka

> falls in Gemini).

> * It is relevant that, Sun is placed in Aries sign, in an area within

> Aries sign that is ascribed to Aries and mars.

> * It is relevant that Saturn is placed in Libra sign, in an area

> within Libra sign that is ascribed to Gemini and mercury.

> * Saturn navamsaka is in Gemini, 3rd house from Natal Lagna. This is

> relevant because Saturn is placed in an area (with in Libra sign) that

> is ascribed to Gemini and mercury. Thus that Saturn will definitely

> affect the qualities of Gemini and its lord mercury. So this is

> relevant.

> * But what relevance the statement " Saturn navamsaka is third from

> Lagnamsaka in Aries " has? What is the meaning it conveys? Does it

> convey any meaning at all?! So this is IRRELEVANT. (Try to see this

> point). What will you " understand " if someone says that saturn's amsa

> is in 3rd house from lagnamsaka?

> Do you have any quotes with you to tell the results for the same?

> No

> Can you come to any conclusion about the REAL position (producing

> same result) of Lagna or Saturn from the same? No.

> Does any astrological classic advice you to look at other amsa

> positions from lagnamsaka? No

> The why this stupidity? Are we trying to learn ancient indian

> astrology as guided/taught by the ancient astrological classics or are

> we trying to build a new (but illogical) system?

> If we are " trying to learn the ancient indian astrology as taught by

> the sages " , then definitely D-charts is not the path to take. Hope I

> have clarified my stand point.

> //> Having been convinced about the working of divisional charts, I

> would like

> > you to think of them with respect and not like some BATS hanging in

> dark

> > corners!! :-)//

> They are not even bats in dark corners - but mere darkness!

> //> I would love to find one day, some literature older than what you've

> > handled, which would've mentioned the aspects and transits on amshas

> and

> > make you believe that *true knowledge is what is proven through

> impirical

> > evidence and research*.//

> Something is generally called research only when we have found

> something valuable, or when at least we are in the path. If " I would

> love to find some way " - then that is a mere wish and not research.

> [] Anyway, all the best in your search for the wish fulfillment. But

> I have a simple question - If possibility of something like that was

> present - why there is at least a glimpse of the same some where in the

> vast amount of books and quotes survived? Is it not clear evidence for

> the fact that - it is a wrong path? Why can't we first study, what we

> have already at hand, and try to understand it in a better way; than

> running after a wishful thinking? []

> Love and regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> , neelam gupta

> <neelamgupta07@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreenadh ji,

> >

> > Thanks for taking pains to explain it further. I get your point and

> see what

> > you mean. But why do you see this as a pitfall? A separate chart does

> not

> > change anything but gives us a liberty to view it from various angles.

> > Lagnamsha gains importance but it IS important in any case. One has to

> see

> > how different amshkas are placed from lagna amsha.

> >

> > //Now by fixing the Lagnamsaka as the new starting point you have made

> the

> > whole system upside down, and started committing all the mistakes I

> have

> > mentioned above. In short destroying the traditional system, like a

> > neo-convert! " Putting lagnamsha as lagna " !! Isn't that enough! This is

> the

> > very reason I am against it - because it (D-charts) misleads even the

> > knowledgeable!//

> >

> > The perspective changes, the system does not become upside down. It is

> not

> > rashi chart that one is viewing, but the particular division. As you

> say,

> > the house where lagnamsha fall gains importance. One might just say,

> the

> > house which rises as lagnamsha gains importance.

> >

> > Regarding the aspects and transits in Navamsha, I take your word that

> it is

> > not mentioned in ancient rishi horas, but many later medieval

> astrologers

> > have mentioned aspects which are possible only in amshas. Transits on

> amshas

> > are what Nadi literature is all about. I wonder why you do not

> consider it

> > ancient enough? However, I have not read all ancient works, so I

> cannot

> > comment on that.

> >

> > Having been convinced about the working of divisional charts, I would

> like

> > you to think of them with respect and not like some BATS hanging in

> dark

> > corners!! :-)

> > I would love to find one day, some literature older than what you've

> > handled, which would've mentioned the aspects and transits on amshas

> and

> > make you believe that *true knowledge is what is proven through

> impirical

> > evidence and research*. And even when thus proven, there may not be

> anything

> > new, same old facts and findings rediscovered by mankind in various

> eras.

> >

> > Thanks for the wonderful sharings!

> >

> > Regards

> > Neelam

>

October 11, 2009

Dear Neelam ji, //> Sreenadh ji has also used relative house positions and rulerships of amshas,> but in the natal chart only. I guess he does not take various amshas from> lagna amsha and their house-wise distribution. E.g. mars is in Libra> navamsha which is 5H from lagna navamsha of Gemini. We use it as a> significant factor saying in navamsha LL Mars is in 5H and will have> something to do with 5H. There lies the major difference. // You are absolutely right. Ofcourse it can be argued that "here lies the major difference", but

why forget that "Aspects and Transits are NOT considered in navamsaka"

as per the traditional view? Is it that important and a major

difference?! //But I guess it is an additional perspective and much research has proved its worth beyond> doubt. If astrology is logical and planets behave logically, then one can> see their working in many ways.//No, it is NOT logical but ILLOGICAL! Please refer to the following message to know "why counting navamsaka placement from lagnamsaka is wrong?": /message/26179Love and regards,Sreendh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Dear Manoj ji,> > I am just trying to understand why Sreenadh ji feels and says that> Divisional Charts are absurd and thy do not belong to pure ancient> astrology.> While we see these charts just as per pure ancient principles too, except> that we use a separate chart may be for ease of handling.> > Sreenadh ji has also used relative house positions and rulerships of amshas,> but in the natal chart only. I guess he does not take various amshas from> lagna amsha and their house-wise distribution. E.g. mars is in Libra> navamsha which is 5H from lagna navamsha of Gemini. We use it as a> significant factor saying in navamsha LL Mars is in 5H and will have> something to do with 5H. There lies the major difference. But I guess it is> an additional perspective and much research has proved its worth beyond> doubt. If astrology is logical and planets behave logically, then one can> see their working in many ways.> > Regards> Neelam> > > > > 2009/10/11 Manoj Chandran chandran_manoj > >> >> > Dear Neelam Ji,> >> > // I also understand that in South the practice is to mark the amshas on> > the rashi chart itself. But in no way did I ever feel that there was any> > difference in interpretation. //> >> > Not so in Tamil Nadu. All the chennai astrologers my family has been to> > (and God knows they have been to several) always show the Rashi Chart> > juxtaposed with the Navamsha Chart. However, NONE of the astrologers I know> > in South India, take house ruler ship in the Navamsha chart. That is, they> > DONT consider the Navamsha chart as a separate stand alone chart with its> > own houses, rulerships etc, but, definitely erect a Navamsha chart, side by> > side, the Rashi Chart.> >> > In essence their interpretation method is just like what Sreenadh Ji> > explained, only they use the visual aid of a separate chart (which is what> > you are implying I think).> >> > Regards,> >> > -Manoj> >> >> >> >> > ------------------------------> > ** neelam gupta neelamgupta07 > *To:* > > *Sent:* Sun, October 11, 2009 4:02:42 AM> > *Subject:* Re: Re: Application of Amsas> > (Divisions)> >> >> >> > Dear Vandana ji,> >> >> > Thanks for your good words. I am confident that while using the divisional> > charts we are not deviating from the principles prescribed in the classical> > texts.> > I also understand that in South the practice is to mark the amshas on the> > rashi chart itself. But in no way did I ever feel that there was any> > difference in interpretation.> > Many astrologers do not go beyond the Navamsha for divisions. That is a> > separate matter. Since the advent of Parashari, use of various other> > divisions have come into practice. We must test and do researc on all> > available knowledge. Nadi systems are nothing but finer and finest> > divisions. Astrological research is the most difficult one. The object of> > experiments, a human being, itself is extremely complex and we work under> > severe limitations of various kinds. I would digress if I get into that. But> > we all, as sincere scholars, must try to raise our level of understanding> > day by day. We must be able to see the unity in diverse approaches.> > Raaste juda juda hain, par manzil to ek hai!> >> > Regards> > Neelam> >> >> > 2009/10/11 Vandna Misra <vandana_mishra_ 91 vandana_mishra_91 > >> >> >>> >>> >> Dear Neelum,> >> //I am sorry you have to suffer my long mail// NOT AT ALL.so<http://all.so/>long you enrich us with your precious knowledge we are ready to savour every> >> bit of it. I Congratulate you for your detailed discussion,i hope you might> >> be able to explain sreesandhji what we meant when we talk about divisional> >> chart.i am novice to the forum so he might not found me very convincing but> >> you are too old for the forum to be ignored.instead of obstinate one should> >> be receptive to the new ideas,even when not very convinced.especiall y when> >> we are here more a follower than a preacher. Divisional charts are not our> >> creation afterall.> >> Regards.> >> Vandana Mishra> >>> >> --- On *Sat, 10/10/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.comneelamgupta07 >> >* wrote:> >>> >>> >> neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com neelamgupta07> >> Re: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas> >> (Divisions)> >> ancient_indian_ astrology@ . com > >> Saturday, October 10, 2009, 1:59 PM> >>> >>> >> Dear All,> >>> >> I am sorry you all had to suffer my long mail just because Sreenadh ji> >> scoffed at the word CHARTS suffixed to Divisions.:- )> >> I actually feel there is no big difference, except in the way we are able> >> to access the information and draw our own conclusions.> >>> >> Roots and trunk are most important, but without branches, leaves and> >> flowers the tree cannot leave any fruit for posterity.> >>> >> Regards> >> Neelam> >>> >>> >>> > > >>

October 11, 2009

Dear Sreenadh ji,The ancient literature gives quotes about how a planet would behave in different amshas, but nowhere has it been mentioned specifically how to co-relate and collate such information and how to use it. Please let us know if there is any such reference. Even in the Athavargavivekadhyaya of BPHS, about the use of divisions, its says, “Navamshe Kalatranam”. Now how best to see it has been left to the user, might have been taught orally earlier. It is up to us to use all such information with intelligence, intuition and innovation.

It was revealed by some scholars, who had learnt through oral tradition, that examination of amshas should be done by making Varga Charts and correlating information from such charts seem to make matters pertaining to that area much clearer. Various commentators of BPHS is a case in point. Even there lies a big area of research since they have not made clear how to us the varga charts. They have even advocated the importance of Navamsha chart which should be read just like an independent chart to get further details about the strength of planets. Reading of relative positioning from lagnamsha has also been suggested. E.g., Third house from dreshkan lagna should be examined more specifically for coborns, just as third house from Mars should be. Third house and a planet in third from Navamsha lagna should be examined for matters related to third house of spouse and a planet gone in third from there should be examined thus. If you do not want to accept it and wish to call it stupid and absurd, it is your sweet will. To each his own!

Aspects in Vargas have been recommended and used by some texts and denied by some. It is entirely up to different schools of thought to adopt them. Scholars like Dhundi Raja have even given elaborate results of aspects in Vargas. Several studies have shown that planets which continue their Sambandh in related vargas give results accordingly in their dashas and antars. Transits on Vargas similarly is another tool which evolves from Nadi literature. You may say they are not ancient works, I have no problem. All areas are still open to more research since the point is not to decry the ancient systems but to enhance our own understanding.

I think this is my last say on this topic. I must follow the path I chose because for me the pitfall is when we close our doors to innovation and research for better understanding of traditional wisdom.

Thanks and regardsNeelam

October 11, 2009

Dear Utkal ji, Research?!! What research?!! Who is doing research here to find new stupidities? Please let me clarify - No body is doing research here. We are just trying to learn the ancient system AS IT IS as taught by the sages. * NOT trying to ADD anything foolishly without knowing the basics. * NOT trying to DELETE anything that was part of the system from the very beginning. In short it is just a purification and systematizing effort and no search/research is happening here. We are NOT here to find anything new, but to learn and understand in a better way 'what is already taught by the sages'. If you think that is re-search, then yes, re-search is happening here; if you think that finding and including new stupidities into the ancient system is and should be called re-search, then sorry, No re-search is happening here! Establishing the old and not inventing the new - is the purpose of this group; and that is the very reason for the group name "ancient indian astrology". It is study of the ancient/traditional system that should happen here, that too based old textual references. Finding supporting logics, elaborating based on available fragments and basement (just to fill the gaps) are all secondary, even though part of the system. Newborn systems and logics that violate the foundation should not be accepted in the name of search or research. Love and regards,Sreenadh , "utkal.panigrahi" <utkal.panigrahi wrote:>> Dear Srinadh Ji,> > Are you not putting in another words the assessment of strength and intrisic quality of a planet by being placed at a certain area within a sign, this is what, i have been saying since very first mail on D charts, every body who thought over implications of D charts, w'd say same.> > What's new in that, What is the research in it ?> > regards,> Utkal.

October 11, 2009

Dear Sreenadh ji and all,

I am a bit confused with the current discussions.

1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and also aspects in divisional charts in his book "Notable Horoscopes". So has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in his later books .

Are they all wrong ?

2) Deva Karalam considers movement of Saturn in sign denoted by navamsha occupied by Lord of 2nd house, or a Trine thereof, on the degree of that sign Lord, would kill ones wife. (Verses 4357-58).

Should we consider the Deva Keralam as not Ancient, and wrong ?

3) Chandrakala Nadi - Verse No. 2191 also considers effects of Navamsha transit. Is it not ancient and wrong ?

Navamsha is also a divisional chart. (Chart is a diagramatical representation to make the study easier).

So what is right and wrong ?

And are we qualified to consider them as wrong ?

I am not presentng my personal views here at all on the Divisional charts, and neither giving approval or disapproval on use of aspects in the Divisional Charts.

regards/Bhaskar.

October 11, 2009

Dear Bhaskar ji,Yes, unfortunately, Sreeenadh ji thinks they're all ABSURD and STUPID! And by advocating them or using them here, probably we are defying the purpose of the group.RegardsNeelam

2009/10/12 Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish

Dear Sreenadh ji and all,

I am a bit confused with the current discussions.

1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and also aspects in divisional charts in his book " Notable Horoscopes " . So has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in his later books .

Are they all wrong ?

2) Deva Karalam considers movement of Saturn in sign denoted by navamsha occupied by Lord of 2nd house, or a Trine thereof, on the degree of that sign Lord, would kill ones wife. (Verses 4357-58).

Should we consider the Deva Keralam as not Ancient, and wrong ?

3) Chandrakala Nadi - Verse No. 2191 also considers effects of Navamsha transit. Is it not ancient and wrong ?

Navamsha is also a divisional chart. (Chart is a diagramatical representation to make the study easier).

So what is right and wrong ?

And are we qualified to consider them as wrong ?

I am not presentng my personal views here at all on the Divisional charts, and neither giving approval or disapproval on use of aspects in the Divisional Charts.

regards/Bhaskar.

October 11, 2009

Thanks,Moujiji for the beautiful explaination of vimshamsha of rao sir.

looking forward for the guidance in future,although i have been told that nobody sitting here to teach me.but i believe where there is will there is way.

Regards.

Vandana Mishra--- On Fri, 10/9/09, Manoj Kumar <mouji99 wrote:

Manoj Kumar <mouji99Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 5:40 AM

Dear Vandna ji,

Look for Moon specially in Vimshamsha. Look at Shri K.N. Rao's Chart and you will find Moon exalted in Vimshamsha. What an excellent tool. Exalted fifth lord in the fifth house and how beautifully he has been imparting knowledge of astrology/spiritual ity to his students and how his students are benefitting from it and more importantly, Ketu placed in the twlefth house from his Moon.

regards,

Mouji--- On Fri, 10/9/09, Vandna <vandana_mishra_ 91 > wrote:

Vandna <vandana_mishra_ 91 >[ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)ancient_indian_ astrologyFriday, October 9, 2009, 11:03 AM

Respected Sreesongji,I welcome your suggestion with open heart,i understand this forum is not school where a student can ask his teacher to clear his doubts.However the credential of the institute cannot be questioned on the poor performance of a student.They are exprtise in their traits and they will remain the same.What i can do is to follow its tradition,by contributing something to All.so the moment i will well acquaint with the vimshamsha i will start the discussion.what i needed is your blessings to reach mygoal.Regards.VANDNA MISHRAancient_indian_ astrology, "sreesog" <sreesog > wrote:>> Dear Vandana ji,> //> As you know the basic aim to study divisional chart is to confirm/or> negate the promise..///> The point is -

let me state it clearly - "Divisional charts are NOT> supported by astrological classics and SHOULD NOT be a major subject of> discussion in this group on Ancient Indian Astrology which tries to> approach astrology based on traditional astrological classics and> quotes". Hope I am clear. (Please clear your confusion regarding the> Division (of sign) and Divisional chart first)> Now coming to the division Vimsamsa, if you want to study and discuss> this subject, then provide the slokas that deals with the same first. We> will discuss them in detail and will try to apply them in horoscope - to> learn together.> //> what i am looking forward from our seniors and experienced> astrologers is to findout> > what parameters one should follow to do the comparative study of both> the charts.//> None is sitting here with a ready made solution to teach you. It

is> you who mentioned in one earlier mail that you are all experts in the> use of Vimsamsa in BVB. So it is upto you to start the discussion. If> so - great - then please approach Vimsamsa in the traditional way and> let us have the feast of informative discussion.> Love and regards,> Sreenadh> > ancient_indian_ astrology, Vandna Misra> <vandana_mishra_ 91@> wrote:> >> > Respected Sreesongji,> > As you know the basic aim to study divisional chart is to confirm/or> negate the promise laid down in lagna chart.in my opinion it cannot be> read independently. it only acts as supporting tool for lagna chart yes> divisional chart does open few new windows about the concerned house>

which otherwise not very clear in our natal chart.. however there is no> question of giving any prediction only through divisional chart.> >> > what I have been taught by my astrology teachers is that vinshamsha is> used to judge the spiritual attributes of the native.. their words are> astrological quotes for me..... .again it has to be study along with> the natal chart.> >> > what i am looking forward from our seniors and experienced astrologers> is to findout> > what parameters one should follow to do the comparative study of both> the charts.and reach any conclusion.Kindly keep in mind here i am> interested in learning only vimshamsha.as nothing much said or done in> this area. the easiest part would be to take any live chart from our> forum and do the analysis.> > Regards.> > Vandana Mishra> >> >

--- On Thu, 10/8/09, sreesog sreesog@ wrote:> >> >> > sreesog sreesog@> > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas> (Divisions)> > ancient_indian_ astrology> > Thursday, October 8, 2009, 4:29 PM> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Dear Vandana ji,> > //.lets see who is brave enough to come forward to shower his / her> wealth of astrological> > knowledge upon us.//> > I am among people who is struggling to understand the correct> interpretation of Rasi Chart and Navamsa. Even hora (D-2) is a> difficult area for me, what to say of Vimsamsa (D-20). Such challenges > are always good, since such

questions keeps us informed about the> knowledge and understanding level of both the challenger and the those> who respond or not respond to it.> > By the way can you give me the quotes that states what to predict> using Vimsamsa (of Lagna or any other sign) - we will discuss the same> in detail.. But, please don't bring in the new born concept of> D-Charts, that is not supported by ancient texts including BPHS.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh>

October 11, 2009

Dear Neelam ji,

//The

ancient literature gives quotes about how a planet would behave in different

amshas, but nowhere has it been mentioned specifically how to co-relate and

collate such information and how to use it. Please let us know if there is any

such reference. //

Please refer to the write-up "How

to predict with Navamsa? " to get a start.

//It

was revealed by some scholars, who had learnt through oral tradition, that

examination of amshas should be done by making Varga Charts.....//

Means, you to agree that there is NO ANCIENT TEXTUAL REFERENCE in

support for the use of "Varga Charts". Good. Then too you want to use that

path - then yes, it is your wish.

//Aspects

in Vargas have been recommended and used by some texts and denied by some. It

is entirely up to different schools of thought to adopt them. Scholars like

Dhundi Raja have even given elaborate results of aspects in Vargas. //

This is erroneous information + misinterpretation! Not a single ancient

text advocates aspect in vargas - no, not even Dundi Raja! Please quote your

relevant verse and provide its meaning - let us discuss it. It will become

clear that even Dundi raja is NOT speaking about aspect in varga charts! If

even varga charts where unknown to Dundi Raja then how can aspects in varga

charts be! Dundi Raja is speaking about aspect

between planets in Natal Rasi chart itself, but for planets having Navamsaka in

some particular signs. In short Dundi Raja or no other ancient scholar speak

about "aspect in navamsa chart". Please try to understand those

words of Dundi Raja. Similar results are told by Mihira in Brihat Jataka as

well.

//Transits

on Vargas similarly is another tool which evolves from Nadi literature. //

So you accept that there is no such concept in standard traditional

astrology - whether it be the arsha school, Jain school or Yavana school. Good.

The Nadi system, Jaimini system,

Tajik system, Lalkitab system, Ramala system etc are much different system

compared to standard traditional astrology (mainly represented by Arsha

school). Mixing of systems (and thus making a kichadi) is usually not advisable

- and is certain to lead to confusions and misunderstandings. Now coming to

Nadi system - it in itself has various traditions. There are Nadis that uses

sayana system, there are nadis that depend on division of zodiac in to

different named amsas, there are nadis that depend on various mantaras, there

are nadis that depend on palmistry as well and so on. Even mixing of

different nadi traditions is not advisable - what to say about mixing of nadi

systems with traditional nirayana astrology! OK. For argument sake, let me

accept that some nadi speaks about transit in vargas - which is that nadi? Do

you have the reference? Are you sure that you understood the meaning of the relevent

quote correctly and that means and points to "transit in varga

charts" itself? Please reply sincerely. Don't you think that such

questions are relevant and important especially when the concept is against the

fundamentals and does not find any reference in traditional nirayana astrology?

//for

me the pitfall is when we close our doors to innovation and research for better

understanding of traditional wisdom.//

It is not about closing the doors, but about purifying the system based

on fundamentals. It is about being sincere to the teachings of ancient sages

and astro classics. In the name of research we are not supposed to corrupt the

system (and invent new theories), but instead find the ancient treasures (which

were already there), make it shine and present before the mass.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh--- On Sun, 10/11/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:neelam gupta <neelamgupta07Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:56 PM

Dear Sreenadh ji,The ancient literature gives quotes about how a planet would behave in different amshas, but nowhere has it been mentioned specifically how to co-relate and collate such information and how to use it. Please let us know if there is any such reference. Even in the Athavargavivekadhyaya of BPHS, about the use of divisions, its says, â€œNavamshe Kalatranamâ€. Now how best to see it has been left to the user, might have been taught orally earlier. It is up to us to use all such information with intelligence, intuition and innovation.

It was revealed by some scholars, who had learnt through oral tradition, that examination of amshas should be done by making Varga Charts and correlating information from such charts seem to make matters pertaining to that area much clearer. Various commentators of BPHS is a case in point. Even there lies a big area of research since they have not made clear how to us the varga charts. They have even advocated the importance of Navamsha chart which should be read just like an independent chart to get further details about the strength of planets. Reading of relative positioning from lagnamsha has also been suggested. E.g., Third house from dreshkan lagna should be examined more specifically for coborns, just as third house from Mars should be. Third house and a planet in third from Navamsha lagna should be examined for matters related to third house of spouse and a planet gone in third from there should be examined thus. If you

do not want to accept it and wish to call it stupid and absurd, it is your sweet will. To each his own!

Aspects in Vargas have been recommended and used by some texts and denied by some. It is entirely up to different schools of thought to adopt them. Scholars like Dhundi Raja have even given elaborate results of aspects in Vargas. Several studies have shown that planets which continue their Sambandh in related vargas give results accordingly in their dashas and antars. Transits on Vargas similarly is another tool which evolves from Nadi literature. You may say they are not ancient works, I have no problem. All areas are still open to more research since the point is not to decry the ancient systems but to enhance our own understanding.

I think this is my last say on this topic. I must follow the path I chose because for me the pitfall is when we close our doors to innovation and research for better understanding of traditional wisdom.

Thanks and regardsNeelam

October 11, 2009

Dear Bhaskar ji, // 1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and

also aspects in divisional charts in his book "Notable Horoscopes". So

has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in

his later books .Are they all wrong ?// I haven't read any of them much. But if they did, yes they are. //2) Deva Karalam considers movement of

Saturn in sign denoted by navamsha occupied by Lord of 2nd house, or a

Trine thereof, on the degree of that sign Lord, would kill ones wife.

(Verses 4357-58).

Should we consider the Deva Keralam as not Ancient, and wrong ?

3) Chandrakala Nadi - Verse No. 2191 also considers effects of Navamsha transit. Is it not ancient and wrong ?// Deva Keralam and Chandrakala nadi are one and the same text. Mixing nadi system with traditional nirayana system itself is wrong. But even when we consider such nadi dictums, it will become clear that they are speaking about "The transit of Natal planets in in natal signs, but especially through the signs having navamsaka of certain planets in them". Thus it is all about transit in Rasi chart itself. Please note it - it is NOT about transit of 'virtual' planets in 'virtual navamsa chart'.//And are we qualified to consider them as wrong ?// It does not need much 'qualification' but only the understanding of the basics and sincerity and confidence to spell out our traditional teaching (for me as taught by my guru) and understanding. Hope I have clarified my stand point. Love and regards,Sreenadh--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish wrote:Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 12:05 AM

Dear Sreenadh ji and all,

I am a bit confused with the current discussions.

1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and also aspects in divisional charts in his book "Notable Horoscopes". So has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in his later books .

Are they all wrong ?

2) Deva Karalam considers movement of Saturn in sign denoted by navamsha occupied by Lord of 2nd house, or a Trine thereof, on the degree of that sign Lord, would kill ones wife. (Verses 4357-58).

Should we consider the Deva Keralam as not Ancient, and wrong ?

3) Chandrakala Nadi - Verse No. 2191 also considers effects of Navamsha transit. Is it not ancient and wrong ?

Navamsha is also a divisional chart. (Chart is a diagramatical representation to make the study easier).

So what is right and wrong ?

And are we qualified to consider them as wrong ?

I am not presentng my personal views here at all on the Divisional charts, and neither giving approval or disapproval on use of aspects in the Divisional Charts.

regards/Bhaskar.

__._,

October 12, 2009

Dear Sreenadh jiNamaskarI , don't mind , in current scenario if some one is working in any old topic or

subject , and recollecting the data, or as you said purifying an ancient knowledge, it also called research, of course they are not doing invention.Respectfully i would like to say , that your body language is not humble and it seems that it is full of proud( Abhiman is more appropriate word).Basically I am a research scientist , so I tried to correct U.Great regardsDr Mishra -Canada--- On Sun, 10/11/09, sreesog <sreesog wrote:sreesog <sreesog Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Received: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 6:27 PM

Dear Utkal ji, Research?!! What research?!! Who is doing research here to find new stupidities? Please let me clarify - No body is doing research here.. We are just trying to learn the ancient system AS IT IS as taught by the sages. * NOT trying to ADD anything foolishly without knowing the basics. * NOT trying to DELETE anything that was part of the system from the very beginning. In short it is just a purification and systematizing effort and no search/research is happening here. We are NOT here to find anything new, but to learn and understand in a better way 'what is already taught by the sages'. If you think that is re-search, then yes, re-search is happening here; if you think that finding and including new stupidities into the ancient system is and should be called re-search, then sorry, No re-search is happening here! Establishing the old and not inventing the new - is the purpose of this group; and that is the very reason for the group name "ancient indian astrology". It is study of the ancient/traditional system that should happen here, that too based old textual references. Finding supporting logics, elaborating based on available fragments and basement (just to fill the gaps) are all secondary, even though part of the system. Newborn systems and logics that violate the foundation should not be accepted in the name of search or research. Love and regards,Sreenadh ancient_indian_ astrology, "utkal.panigrahi" <utkal.panigrahi@ ...> wrote:>> Dear Srinadh Ji,> > Are you not putting in another words the assessment of strength and intrisic quality of a planet by being

placed at a certain area within a sign, this is what, i have been saying since very first mail on D charts, every body who thought over implications of D charts, w'd say same.> > What's new in that, What is the research in it ?> > regards,> Utkal.

The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Get it Now for Free!

October 12, 2009

Dear Akhil Mishra ji, Please look at the logics and arguments presented in scholarly discussions, and not to the 'body language' of some one invisible and alien to you. That would be much helpful, whether it be astro research or science research. Note: You are science researcher or a common man does not hold any importance here, but only the soundness of the arguments presented, and the references provided. If 'body language' is what desides the trthness of falsehood of something, then some 'vinayavan' would be sitting on the seat of scientific searchers and re-searchers, rather than scientists themselves. Even if you are a common man without any digrees, an argument presented with logic and astro reference and is in tune with reality (actual asto prediction) would be accepted here, and even if told by a nobal price winner if without logic and astro reference and not in tune with reality would be thrown away like mud. Love and regards,Sreenadh , Akhil Mishra <astro6301 wrote:>> Dearï¿½Sreenadh ji> Namaskar> I ,ï¿½don'tï¿½ mind , in current ï¿½scenario if some one ï¿½is working ï¿½in any ï¿½old ï¿½topic or subject , andï¿½recollectingï¿½the data, or ï¿½as you said ï¿½purifying ï¿½an ancient ï¿½knowledge, it also ï¿½called ï¿½research, of course they are not doing invention.> Respectfully ï¿½i would like ï¿½to ï¿½say , that your ï¿½body language ï¿½is not ï¿½humbleï¿½ï¿½and ï¿½it seems ï¿½that ï¿½it is full of ï¿½proud( Abhiman is ï¿½more appropriate ï¿½word).> Basically ï¿½I am ï¿½a research ï¿½scientist , so ï¿½I tried ï¿½to ï¿½correct U.> Great ï¿½regards> Dr Mishra ï¿½-Canada

October 12, 2009

Dear Sreenadh ji,I do not wish to argue with someone who thinks only he is RIGHT and all others, even those luminaries like KN Rao and BV Raman are WRONG! Truth must be seen in many ways, if we do not agree on that, all arguments must stop. It is not acceptable that you call the divine souls like KNR and their immense body of work foolish and stupid. Their contribution to Jyotish is unparalleled and you are not yet qualified to pass any judgment!

I do not need to learn 'How to read Amshas' from you because I am confident of my learning as taught by my Gurus. Being humble is not being WRONG! Your messages reek of egotism, better check out! Anyways, you are free to stay with your view points just as I am free to move on my chosen path. I withdraw myself from these futile arguments.

Thanks and RegardsNeelamPS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the half-vessels which are dug out!

October 12, 2009

Dear Bhaskar ji,//>//And are we qualified to consider them as wrong ?// It

does not need much 'qualification' but only the understanding of the

basics and sincerity and confidence to spell out our traditional

teaching (for me as taught by my guru) and understanding. // Add to it the fact that, the whole of Kerala astrological tradition - starting from 4th Century period of Vararuchi, through the 15th century period of Prashnamarga and Dasadhyayi, to till date to the numerous books getting published there - in its unbroken tradition is using DIVISIONS in this way ONLY. (And NOT AS D-CHARTS with notorious "aspects in D-charts", "Transit in D-charts" and "Lagnamsa as starting point in D-charts" - all against tradition!) The point is - I emphasis - you CANNOT find even a single traditional text that supports any of the above 3 erroneous concepts in ancient astro classics however you try! Ofcourse D-chartists are trying misinterpret (either intentionally or due to their ignorance) in their favor for long - but still they are unsuccessful doing so effectively till date. I could only say - good god! The truth prevails! Love and regards,Sreenadh , Sreenadh OG <sreesog wrote:Dear Bhaskar ji, // 1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and

also aspects in divisional charts in his book "Notable Horoscopes". So

has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in

his later books .Are they all wrong ?// I haven't read any of them much. But if they did, yes they are. //2) Deva Karalam considers movement of

Saturn in sign denoted by navamsha occupied by Lord of 2nd house, or a

Trine thereof, on the degree of that sign Lord, would kill ones wife.

(Verses 4357-58).

Should we consider the Deva Keralam as not Ancient, and wrong ?

3) Chandrakala Nadi - Verse No. 2191 also considers effects of Navamsha transit. Is it not ancient and wrong ?//

Deva Keralam and Chandrakala nadi are one and the same text. Mixing

nadi system with traditional nirayana system itself is wrong. But even

when we consider such nadi dictums, it will become clear that they are

speaking about "The transit of Natal planets in in natal signs, but

especially through the signs having navamsaka of certain planets in

them". Thus it is all about transit in Rasi chart itself. Please note

it - it is NOT about transit of 'virtual' planets in 'virtual navamsa

chart'.//And are we qualified to consider them as wrong ?// It

does not need much 'qualification' but only the understanding of the

basics and sincerity and confidence to spell out our traditional

teaching (for me as taught by my guru) and understanding. Hope I have clarified my stand point. Love and regards,Sreenadh> > --- On Mon, 10/12/09, Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish wrote:> > Bhaskar bhaskar_jyotish Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)> > Monday, October 12, 2009, 12:05 AM> Dear Sreenadh ji and all,> ï¿½> I am a bit confused with the current discussions.> ï¿½> 1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and also aspects inï¿½divisional charts in his book "Notable Horoscopes". So has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in his later books .> Are they all wrong ?> ï¿½> 2) Deva Karalam considers movement of Saturn in sign denoted by navamsha occupied by Lord of 2ndï¿½house, or a Trine thereof, on the degree of that sign Lord, ï¿½would kill ones wife. (Verses 4357-58).> Should we consider the Deva Keralam as not Ancient, and wrong ?> ï¿½> 3) Chandrakala Nadi - Verse No. 2191 also considers effects of Navamsha transit. Is it not ancient and wrong ?> ï¿½> Navamsha is also a divisional chart. (Chart is a diagramatical representation to make the study easier).> ï¿½> So what is right and wrong ?> ï¿½> And are we qualified to consider them as wrong ?> ï¿½> I am not presentng my personal views here at all on the Divisional charts, and neither giving approval or disapproval on use of aspects in the Divisional Charts.> ï¿½> regards/Bhaskar.

October 12, 2009

Dear Neelam ji, What I said, please look back -//// 1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and

also aspects in divisional charts in his book "Notable Horoscopes". So

has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in

his later books .Are they all wrong ?// I haven't read any of them much. But if they did, yes they are. // I said "if they have supported D-charts then they are wrong in that" - that is my opinion. What is the problem in that? * Do you think that ALL the arguments provided by BVR or KNR would be right?!! * Do you think that we don't have ANY right to reject even one of their arguments, even when we think that it is erronious? * Why don't you understand that it is not about rejecting all their contribution, but about one particular opinion only? * Does it in any way mean that ALL their contributions are unworthy?! The contributions of BVR, KNR, SR, Santanam etc are all much valuable and should be appreciated. But please try to note that - * They themselves disagreed with each other on many things - and this is well acceptable, because individuals are not photocopies. * If we value the contribution of someone or respect him do not mean that we should ALL his arguments as if the words of god that will never err! Please be realistic.//> I do not need to learn 'How to read Amshas' from you because I am confident> of my learning as taught by my Gurus.// Good - I am not here to question that. You are good enough to form your own opinion. //> Anyways, you are free to stay with your view points just as I am free to> move on my chosen path.// I agree and appreciate such a view point.//> PS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the> half-vessels which are dug out!// Please control your anger - it is not required. Love and regards,Sreenadh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Dear Sreenadh ji,> > I do not wish to argue with someone who thinks only he is RIGHT and all> others, even those luminaries like KN Rao and BV Raman are WRONG! Truth must> be seen in many ways, if we do not agree on that, all arguments must stop.> It is not acceptable that you call the divine souls like KNR and their> immense body of work foolish and stupid. Their contribution to Jyotish is> unparalleled and you are not yet qualified to pass any judgment!> > I do not need to learn 'How to read Amshas' from you because I am confident> of my learning as taught by my Gurus. Being humble is not being WRONG! Your> messages reek of egotism, better check out!> > Anyways, you are free to stay with your view points just as I am free to> move on my chosen path. I withdraw myself from these futile arguments.> > Thanks and Regards> Neelam> > PS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the> half-vessels which are dug out!>

October 12, 2009

Dear Sreenadh ji,//Please control your anger - it is not required.//There is absolutely no anger Sreenadh ji. May be I forgot to put a SMILEY.:-)We just shared our respective views. Non-agreement must not lead to anger!

RegardsNeelam2009/10/12 sreesog <sreesog

Dear Neelam ji, What I said, please look back -//// 1) Shri BV Raman has used Navamsha and

also aspects in divisional charts in his book " Notable Horoscopes " . So

has Shri KN rao in almost all his books. And so has Shri Santhanamji in

his later books .Are they all wrong ?//

I haven't read any of them much. But if they did, yes they are. // I said " if they have supported D-charts then they are wrong in that " - that is my opinion. What is the problem in that?

* Do you think that ALL the arguments provided by BVR or KNR would be right?!! * Do you think that we don't have ANY right to reject even one of their arguments, even when we think that it is erronious? * Why don't you understand that it is not about rejecting all their contribution, but about one particular opinion only?

* Does it in any way mean that ALL their contributions are unworthy?! The contributions of BVR, KNR, SR, Santanam etc are all much valuable and should be appreciated. But please try to note that - * They themselves disagreed with each other on many things - and this is well acceptable, because individuals are not photocopies.

* If we value the contribution of someone or respect him do not mean that we should ALL his arguments as if the words of god that will never err! Please be realistic.//> I do not need to learn 'How to read Amshas' from you because I am confident

> of my learning as taught by my Gurus.// Good - I am not here to question that. You are good enough to form your own opinion. //> Anyways, you are free to stay with your view points just as I am free to

> move on my chosen path.// I agree and appreciate such a view point.//> PS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the> half-vessels which are dug out!//

Please control your anger - it is not required.

Love and regards,Sreenadh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

>> Dear Sreenadh ji,> > I do not wish to argue with someone who thinks only he is RIGHT and all> others, even those luminaries like KN Rao and BV Raman are WRONG! Truth must> be seen in many ways, if we do not agree on that, all arguments must stop.

> It is not acceptable that you call the divine souls like KNR and their> immense body of work foolish and stupid. Their contribution to Jyotish is> unparalleled and you are not yet qualified to pass any judgment!

> > I do not need to learn 'How to read Amshas' from you because I am confident> of my learning as taught by my Gurus. Being humble is not being WRONG! Your> messages reek of egotism, better check out!

> > Anyways, you are free to stay with your view points just as I am free to> move on my chosen path. I withdraw myself from these futile arguments.> > Thanks and Regards> Neelam>

> PS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the> half-vessels which are dug out!>

October 12, 2009

Dear ones,i may not be qualified to say anything on the subject but would like to say a few words if i am permitedto.It is said to each his own.This simple sentence can also be interpreted in many ways.Then we are discussing the vast ocean of astrology.I think ultimately it comes to the individual levels(here astrologers).Ultimately it is our own 2ndL/H alongwith 10H/L and their conectivity apart from moon.Is it not so?I would also like to just remind the learned members the planetery configuration is not good enough right now and hence lets all salute them to show the light(jyotish).sarvejana sukhinobhavantu,Love and regards,gopi. , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Dear Sreenadh ji,> > I do not wish to argue with someone who thinks only he is RIGHT and all> others, even those luminaries like KN Rao and BV Raman are WRONG! Truth must> be seen in many ways, if we do not agree on that, all arguments must stop.> It is not acceptable that you call the divine souls like KNR and their> immense body of work foolish and stupid. Their contribution to Jyotish is> unparalleled and you are not yet qualified to pass any judgment!> > I do not need to learn 'How to read Amshas' from you because I am confident> of my learning as taught by my Gurus. Being humble is not being WRONG! Your> messages reek of egotism, better check out!> > Anyways, you are free to stay with your view points just as I am free to> move on my chosen path. I withdraw myself from these futile arguments.> > Thanks and Regards> Neelam> > PS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the> half-vessels which are dug out!>

October 12, 2009

I think, moon the 10th lord placed in lagna, which is tula in this case, and if

such a moon is exalted in D 24, wd say good knowledge of professional domain,

good social networking and applause.

However, for knowledge of astrology which was not his profession, one should

consider jup, Sun and Sat's (5th lord) strength also.

Regards,

Utkal.

, Vandna Misra

<vandana_mishra_91 wrote:

>

> Thanks,Moujiji for the beautiful explaination of vimshamsha of rao sir.

>

> looking forward for the guidance in future,although i have been told that

nobody sitting here to teach me.but i believe where there is will there is way.

> Regards.

> Vandana Mishra

>

> --- On Fri, 10/9/09, Manoj Kumar <mouji99 wrote:

>

> Manoj Kumar <mouji99

> Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

>

> Friday, October 9, 2009, 5:40 AM

>

Dear Vandna ji,

>

> Look for Moon specially in Vimshamsha. Look at Shri K.N. Rao's Chart and you

will find Moon exalted in Vimshamsha. What an excellent tool. Exalted fifth lord

in the fifth house and how beautifully he has been imparting knowledge of

astrology/spiritual ity to his students and how his students are benefitting

from it and more importantly, Ketu placed in the twlefth house from his Moon.

>

> regards,

>

> Mouji

>

> --- On Fri, 10/9/09, Vandna <vandana_mishra_ 91 > wrote:

>

> Vandna <vandana_mishra_ 91 >

> [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

> ancient_indian_ astrology

> Friday, October 9, 2009, 11:03 AM

>

> Respected Sreesongji,

> I welcome your suggestion with open heart,i understand this forum is not

school where a student can ask his teacher to clear his doubts.However the

credential of the institute cannot be questioned on the poor performance of a

student.They are exprtise in their traits and they will remain the same.

> What i can do is to follow its tradition,by contributing something to All.so

the moment i will well acquaint with the vimshamsha i will start the

discussion.what i needed is your blessings to reach my

> goal.

> Regards.

> VANDNA MISHRA

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology, " sreesog " <sreesog@ >

wrote:

> >

> > Dear Vandana ji,

> > //> As you know the basic aim to study divisional chart is to confirm/or

> > negate the promise..///

> > The point is - let me state it clearly - " Divisional charts are NOT

> > supported by astrological classics and SHOULD NOT be a major subject of

> > discussion in this group on Ancient Indian Astrology which tries to

> > approach astrology based on traditional astrological classics and

> > quotes " . Hope I am clear. (Please clear your confusion regarding the

> > Division (of sign) and Divisional chart first)

> > Now coming to the division Vimsamsa, if you want to study and discuss

> > this subject, then provide the slokas that deals with the same first. We

> > will discuss them in detail and will try to apply them in horoscope - to

> > learn together.

> > //> what i am looking forward from our seniors and experienced

> > astrologers is to findout

> > > what parameters one should follow to do the comparative study of both

> > the charts.//

> > None is sitting here with a ready made solution to teach you. It is

> > you who mentioned in one earlier mail that you are all experts in the

> > use of Vimsamsa in BVB. So it is upto you to start the discussion. If

> > so - great - then please approach Vimsamsa in the traditional way and

> > let us have the feast of informative discussion.

> > Love and regards,

> > Sreenadh

> >

> > ancient_indian_ astrology, Vandna Misra

> > <vandana_mishra_ 91@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Respected Sreesongji,

> > > As you know the basic aim to study divisional chart is to confirm/or

> > negate the promise laid down in lagna chart.in my opinion it cannot be

> > read independently. it only acts as supporting tool for lagna chart yes

> > divisional chart does open few new windows about the concerned house

> > which otherwise not very clear in our natal chart.. however there is no

> > question of giving any prediction only through divisional chart.

> > >

> > > what I have been taught by my astrology teachers is that vinshamsha is

> > used to judge the spiritual attributes of the native.. their words are

> > astrological quotes for me..... .again it has to be study along with

> > the natal chart.

> > >

> > > what i am looking forward from our seniors and experienced astrologers

> > is to findout

> > > what parameters one should follow to do the comparative study of both

> > the charts.and reach any conclusion.Kindly keep in mind here i am

> > interested in learning only vimshamsha.as nothing much said or done in

> > this area. the easiest part would be to take any live chart from our

> > forum and do the analysis.

> > > Regards.

> > > Vandana Mishra

> > >

> > > --- On Thu, 10/8/09, sreesog sreesog@ wrote:

> > >

> > > sreesog sreesog@

> > > [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas

> > (Divisions)

> > > ancient_indian_ astrology

> > > Thursday, October 8, 2009, 4:29 PM

> > >

> > > Dear Vandana ji,

> > > //.lets see who is brave enough to come forward to shower his / her

> > wealth of astrological

> > > knowledge upon us.//

> > > I am among people who is struggling to understand the correct

> > interpretation of Rasi Chart and Navamsa. Even hora (D-2) is a

> > difficult area for me, what to say of Vimsamsa (D-20). Such challenges

> > are always good, since such questions keeps us informed about the

> > knowledge and understanding level of both the challenger and the those

> > who respond or not respond to it.

> > > By the way can you give me the quotes that states what to predict

> > using Vimsamsa (of Lagna or any other sign) - we will discuss the same

> > in detail.. But, please don't bring in the new born concept of

> > D-Charts, that is not supported by ancient texts including BPHS.

> > > Love and regards,

> > > Sreenadh

> >

>

October 12, 2009

Dear Neelam Gupta,

It is always healthy to express your views independently with out any bias/ prejudice. I have full regards and respect for Sh. KN Rao, he is my astrology guru. .I have studied under his guidance and taught in BVB under his guidance. All his books are with me. I have value for his opinion. But still we have difference of opinion. I do nor favour to analyse the varga chart independently and construct the chart as per his advise. I have same respect for the Dr. BV Raman and all his books are with me. He freely and frankly said to me that he does not know the remedies and advise me in writing that I should consult some one other for the same, when I said to him that by telling the people that he is running the dasha of Saturn or Rahu or Sade satti etc. He is creating fear psychosis among the people. Same is the case with Sh Santhanam. He encouraged me to write in Times of Astrology. There are so many other astrologers who are contributing for the

development of Astrology. Still our predictions fails because we have to work unitedly and hard to understand the astrology still more and deeply. We are failure in Mundane.

So please do not get disturbed by difference of opinion and people may contradict your favourid teacher. Sh. KN Rao has difference of opinion with Dr. BVRaman though both have worked together.

Good thought may come from every direction.

Sarve santu sukhina.--- On Mon, 10/12/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 10:23 AM

Dear Sreenadh ji,I do not wish to argue with someone who thinks only he is RIGHT and all others, even those luminaries like KN Rao and BV Raman are WRONG! Truth must be seen in many ways, if we do not agree on that, all arguments must stop. It is not acceptable that you call the divine souls like KNR and their immense body of work foolish and stupid. Their contribution to Jyotish is unparalleled and you are not yet qualified to pass any judgment!I do not need to learn 'How to read Amshas' from you because I am confident of my learning as taught by my Gurus. Being humble is not being WRONG! Your messages reek of egotism, better check out! Anyways, you are free to stay with your view points just as I am free to move on my chosen path. I withdraw myself from these futile arguments.Thanks and RegardsNeelamPS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the half-vessels which are dug out!

October 12, 2009

Dear Sreenadh ji,

I was referring to your earlier reply on education matter where you had written

" If amsaka of 4th lord is malefic, native shall do poor in education if amsaka

of 4th lord is benefic, he shall do good in education. "

And I wrote to you that amsaka of 4th lord shall not change in ASC window of

Rasi chart. Lagnamsaka shall definitely change.And also Amsaka of 4th house. And

this is reason I sought example when Rasi chart has to say somehing of education

and differences comes because of Divisions. If you use Lagnamsaka, it is nothing

but ASC of Divisional chart. Please elaborate for understanding.

regds

Dev

, " sreesog " <sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Dev ji,

> //> By Amsaka, what I understand is sign in which Amsa falls. Correct me

> if I am wrong.//

> You understanding is correct.

> //> To me , amsaka shall not change for 4th lord in ASC (Rasi chart)

> window. Amsaka of 4th house shall change.//

> I couldn't understand this sentence. If you are speaking about

> Lagnamsa and Lagnamsaka then,

> * Lagna stays in a sign for 2 hours approx.

> * Lagnamsa (position within sign where Asc is present) changes in 13

> min 20 sec each (approx)

> * When the Lagnamsa change naturally the Lagnamsaka (Sign in which

> Lagnamsa falls) will also change. That means Lagnamsa also changes

> after each 13 min 20 sec time.

> But for other planets, since the speed of planets differ, the

> duration within which the planet changes the Amsa and Amsaka will depend

> on the speed of the planet.

> Love and regards,

> Sreenadh

>

> , " axeplex " <axeplex@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sreenadh ji,

> >

> > I would love to see some examples if you can explain it with.

> > By Amsaka, what I understand is sign in which Amsa falls. Correct me

> if I am wrong.

> >

> > To me , amsaka shall not change for 4th lord in ASC (Rasi chart)

> window. Amsaka of 4th house shall change.

> >

> > Regarding some doubts raised by members, I agree with you that 4th is

> for formal education, 5th for Intellect, 9th for higher eucation ....

> >

> > regds

> > Dev

>

October 12, 2009

Dear Neelam ji and all,//> PS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in the half-vessels which are dug out!// If we are into archaeology, and if we want to learn the technique of construction and the technologies used, and if we want to rebuild the ancient building (the masterpiece castle) in its initial grandeur, if we don't have a full vessel in hand now, and if we don't know the original technique and technology of creating vessels then - * should we dug out the ancient half vessels and try to learn the technique and construction? - I think yes! * AFTER THAT should we try to re-create that vessel full by completing it (by filling the knowledge gaps) - I think yes! OR * should we forget the ancient vessel altogether and try creating new vessel even by violating the principles of construction used in creating those ancient vessels? - I think No! * should we stop doing archeology and move into creating new theories without depending on the history, memory and past knowledge at all? - I think No! * Should we join two different vessels of different construction (for e.g. two different astrological systems such as Nadi and Jaimini) and try make them one? - I think No! If we are into archeology then being sincere to evidences we find, and BEING SINCERE TO THEM, and doing the reconstruction IN TUNE WITH the knowledge we unearthed is the right path I think. It is good to re-construct the original, than to create Frankensteins I believe. That is why I am against the newborn monstrous beings such as D-charts, kichdi systems and the like. Let us go back to archeology (ancient indian astrology) itself; dug out half vessels (2 if possible) and convert them to one - using our logic, understanding and sincerity to the subject at hand. Even if we don't find the half vessels, but only pottery fragments then too it is ok - there is always a chance to reconstruct the original, make new vessels based on the same primisiss and principles and use it for good. Further there are many who are already into Frankenstein creation, let us take a different path in this group, the road less travelled - to make a difference. At the end, this group is dedicated to archelogy and not a new Frankenstein creation factory I believe. We can respect the purpose of this group, and at the same time persue our frankenstein creation interests in other groups I belive - that way we will get more ideas, information and lessons as well. I am also with you in this. Love and regards,Sreenadh

October 12, 2009

Dear Sreenadhji,

That's means to say we should stand rigidly at the same place where our ancestor

was, no any further foreword movement on the name of purity !

Once our ancestor was only use " Nakshatra " no any sign systems and house systems

that why we are using this 12 houses and 12 signs of Zodiac ?

You are eating the sweets but saying " I like only sugar " !By only sugar can you

get the test of sweets ?

Thanks,

M.S.Bohra

, " sreesog " <sreesog wrote:

>

> Dear Neelam ji and all,

> //> PS: Archaeology is good and must be pursued, but one cannot eat in

> the half-vessels which are dug out!//

> If we are into archaeology, and if we want to learn the technique of

> construction and the technologies used, and if we want to rebuild the

> ancient building (the masterpiece castle) in its initial grandeur, if we

> don't have a full vessel in hand now, and if we don't know the original

> technique and technology of creating vessels then -

> * should we dug out the ancient half vessels and try to learn the

> technique and construction? - I think yes!

> * AFTER THAT should we try to re-create that vessel full by completing

> it (by filling the knowledge gaps) - I think yes!

> OR

> * should we forget the ancient vessel altogether and try creating new

> vessel even by violating the principles of construction used in creating

> those ancient vessels? - I think No!

> * should we stop doing archeology and move into creating new theories

> without depending on the history, memory and past knowledge at all? - I

> think No!

> * Should we join two different vessels of different construction (for

> e.g. two different astrological systems such as Nadi and Jaimini) and

> try make them one? - I think No!

>

> If we are into archeology then being sincere to evidences we find,

> and BEING SINCERE TO THEM, and doing the reconstruction IN TUNE WITH the

> knowledge we unearthed is the right path I think. It is good to

> re-construct the original, than to create Frankensteins I believe. That

> is why I am against the newborn monstrous beings such as D-charts,

> kichdi systems and the like.

> Let us go back to archeology (ancient indian astrology) itself; dug

> out half vessels (2 if possible) and convert them to one - using our

> logic, understanding and sincerity to the subject at hand. Even if we

> don't find the half vessels, but only pottery fragments then too it is

> ok - there is always a chance to reconstruct the original, make new

> vessels based on the same primisiss and principles and use it for good.

> Further there are many who are already into Frankenstein creation,

> let us take a different path in this group, the road less travelled - to

> make a difference. [] At the end, this group is dedicated to

> archelogy and not a new Frankenstein creation factory I believe.

> We can respect the purpose of this group, and at the same time

> persue our frankenstein creation interests in other groups I belive -

> that way we will get more ideas, information and lessons as well. []

> I am also with you in this. []

> Love and regards,

> Sreenadh

>

October 12, 2009

Dear Learned Seniors,

I have few basic queries about the different Varga systems. It will be

helpful if someone guides me. If you find it too basic...just IGNORE IT.

1) Say, a planet posited in a sign get Aries navamsa. Does it mean that

a) The planets original behaviour (based on its position in Rashi chart)

will be modified and it will behave somewhat like it was posited in

Aries

b) The lord of Aries (Mars) will be impacted as it is housing the planet

Which one of the above is correct ..a) or b) or both a) & b) ?

2) A planet can get Aries navamsa if it is initially posited in any one of

the 9 signs (excluding watery signs). Whather all Aries navamsa does

behave in same way (because the name is same ) ? Or do they differ

in a minor or major way ?

regards

Chakraborty

sreesog [sreesog] Sunday, October 11, 2009 11:39 PM Subject: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

Dear Neelam ji, //> Sreenadh ji has also used relative house positions and rulerships of amshas,> but in the natal chart only. I guess he does not take various amshas from> lagna amsha and their house-wise distribution. E.g. mars is in Libra> navamsha which is 5H from lagna navamsha of Gemini. We use it as a> significant factor saying in navamsha LL Mars is in 5H and will have> something to do with 5H. There lies the major difference. // You are absolutely right. Ofcourse it can be argued that "here lies the major difference", but why forget that "Aspects and Transits are NOT considered in navamsaka" as per the traditional view? Is it that important and a major difference?! //But I guess it is an additional perspective and much research has proved its worth beyond> doubt. If astrology is logical and planets behave logically, then one can> see their working in many ways.//No, it is NOT logical but ILLOGICAL! Please refer to the following message to know "why counting navamsaka placement from lagnamsaka is wrong?": /message/26179Love and regards,Sreendh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Dear Manoj ji,> > I am just trying to understand why Sreenadh ji feels and says that> Divisional Charts are absurd and thy do not belong to pure ancient> astrology.> While we see these charts just as per pure ancient principles too, except> that we use a separate chart may be for ease of handling.> > Sreenadh ji has also used relative house positions and rulerships of amshas,> but in the natal chart only. I guess he does not take various amshas from> lagna amsha and their house-wise distribution. E.g. mars is in Libra> navamsha which is 5H from lagna navamsha of Gemini. We use it as a> significant factor saying in navamsha LL Mars is in 5H and will have> something to do with 5H. There lies the major difference. But I guess it is> an additional perspective and much research has proved its worth beyond> doubt. If astrology is logical and planets behave logically, then one can> see their working in many ways.> > Regards> Neelam> > > > > 2009/10/11 Manoj Chandran chandran_manoj > >> >> > Dear Neelam Ji,> >> > // I also understand that in South the practice is to mark the amshas on> > the rashi chart itself. But in no way did I ever feel that there was any> > difference in interpretation. //> >> > Not so in Tamil Nadu. All the chennai astrologers my family has been to> > (and God knows they have been to several) always show the Rashi Chart> > juxtaposed with the Navamsha Chart. However, NONE of the astrologers I know> > in South India, take house ruler ship in the Navamsha chart. That is, they> > DONT consider the Navamsha chart as a separate stand alone chart with its> > own houses, rulerships etc, but, definitely erect a Navamsha chart, side by> > side, the Rashi Chart.> >> > In essence their interpretation method is just like what Sreenadh Ji> > explained, only they use the visual aid of a separate chart (which is what> > you are implying I think).> >> > Regards,> >> > -Manoj> >> >> >> >> > ------------------------------> > ** neelam gupta neelamgupta07 > *To:* > > *Sent:* Sun, October 11, 2009 4:02:42 AM> > *Subject:* Re: Re: Application of Amsas> > (Divisions)> >> >> >> > Dear Vandana ji,> >> >> > Thanks for your good words. I am confident that while using the divisional> > charts we are not deviating from the principles prescribed in the classical> > texts.> > I also understand that in South the practice is to mark the amshas on the> > rashi chart itself. But in no way did I ever feel that there was any> > difference in interpretation.> > Many astrologers do not go beyond the Navamsha for divisions. That is a> > separate matter. Since the advent of Parashari, use of various other> > divisions have come into practice. We must test and do researc on all> > available knowledge. Nadi systems are nothing but finer and finest> > divisions. Astrological research is the most difficult one. The object of> > experiments, a human being, itself is extremely complex and we work under> > severe limitations of various kinds. I would digress if I get into that. But> > we all, as sincere scholars, must try to raise our level of understanding> > day by day. We must be able to see the unity in diverse approaches.> > Raaste juda juda hain, par manzil to ek hai!> >> > Regards> > Neelam> >> >> > 2009/10/11 Vandna Misra <vandana_mishra_ 91 vandana_mishra_91 > >> >> >>> >>> >> Dear Neelum,> >> //I am sorry you have to suffer my long mail// NOT AT ALL.so<http://all.so/>long you enrich us with your precious knowledge we are ready to savour every> >> bit of it. I Congratulate you for your detailed discussion,i hope you might> >> be able to explain sreesandhji what we meant when we talk about divisional> >> chart.i am novice to the forum so he might not found me very convincing but> >> you are too old for the forum to be ignored.instead of obstinate one should> >> be receptive to the new ideas,even when not very convinced.especiall y when> >> we are here more a follower than a preacher. Divisional charts are not our> >> creation afterall.> >> Regards.> >> Vandana Mishra> >>> >> --- On *Sat, 10/10/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.comneelamgupta07 >> >* wrote:> >>> >>> >> neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com neelamgupta07> >> Re: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas> >> (Divisions)> >> ancient_indian_ astrology@ . com > >> Saturday, October 10, 2009, 1:59 PM> >>> >>> >> Dear All,> >>> >> I am sorry you all had to suffer my long mail just because Sreenadh ji> >> scoffed at the word CHARTS suffixed to Divisions.:- )> >> I actually feel there is no big difference, except in the way we are able> >> to access the information and draw our own conclusions.> >>> >> Roots and trunk are most important, but without branches, leaves and> >> flowers the tree cannot leave any fruit for posterity.> >>> >> Regards> >> Neelam> >>> >>> >>> > > >>This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

October 12, 2009

This also reminds me of a famous song, incidentally the same song was used by Pilooo Modi to intervene in a heated debate between Vajpayee and Nehru in the Parliament, the song goes like, "Woh afsaana jise anjaam tak lana na ho mumkin, use ek khoobsoorat mod dekar chorna achha, chalo ek baar phir se, ajnabi ban jayen hum dono"

best wishes,

Mouji--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Chakraborty, PL <CHAKRABORTYP2 wrote:

Chakraborty, PL <CHAKRABORTYP2RE: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)"' '" Monday, October 12, 2009, 3:03 PM

Dear Learned Seniors,

I have few basic queries about the different Varga systems. It will be

helpful if someone guides me. If you find it too basic...just IGNORE IT.

1) Say, a planet posited in a sign get Aries navamsa. Does it mean that

a) The planets original behaviour (based on its position in Rashi chart)

will be modified and it will behave somewhat like it was posited in

Aries

b) The lord of Aries (Mars) will be impacted as it is housing the planet

Which one of the above is correct ..a) or b) or both a) & b) ?

2) A planet can get Aries navamsa if it is initially posited in any one of

the 9 signs (excluding watery signs). Whather all Aries navamsa does

behave in same way (because the name is same ) ? Or do they differ

in a minor or major way ?

regards

Chakraborty

October 12, 2009

Dear Chakraborty ji, //> 1) Say, a planet posited in a sign get Aries navamsa. Does it mean that> a) The planets original behaviour (based on its position in Rashi chart)> will be modified and it will behave somewhat like it was posited in Aries> b) The lord of Aries (Mars) will be impacted as it is housing the planet> Which one of the above is correct ..a) or b) or both a) & b) ?// To be short - a) & b) is the correct answer. Now let us elaborate - * If a planet posited in a sign gets Aries navamsaKA (it is better to say so - if we use the word navamsa we mean portions within Aries) then the planet's original behavior will be modified and it will behave somewhat like it is posited in Aries. But then the question comes - what modificaion, and what behavior? The answer to this question is available in numerous quotes provided by ancient texts like Saravali, Sphujidwaja hora, Brihat jataka, Rishi horas etc. Further the standard dictums providing the results for "that planet posited in aries" can also be used in a modified way (in a way considering the original placement of the planet, and then its navamsaka in Aries). * The lord of Aries (Mars) for sure will be impacted as it is housing the planet. It can be said that now the lord of Aries has a Bandha (connection) with the planet whose navamska is posited in Aries. Please note that any connection has usually a MUTUAL impact. //> 2) A planet can get Aries navamsa if it is initially posited in any one of> the 9 signs (excluding watery signs). Whather all Aries navamsa does> behave in same way (because the name is same ) ? Or do they differ> in a minor or major way ?// A planet can get Aries NavamsaKA if - 1) if it is placed in the 1st navamsa of Aries 2) if it is placed in the 4th navamsa of Taurus 3) if it is placed in the 7th navamsa of Gemini 4) if it is placed in the 1st navamsa of Leo 5) if it is placed in the 4th navamsa of Virgo 6) if it is placed in the 7th navamsa of Libra 7) if it is placed in the 1st navamsa of Sagitterious

8) if it is placed in the 4th navamsa of Capricon

9) if it is placed in the 7th navamsa of Aquarious Thus you are absolutly right when you say - "A planet can get Aries navamsaKA if it is initially posited in any one of the 9 signs (excluding watery signs)" (Please use the words navamsa and navamsaKA with clear distinction - otherwise it will cause confusion) Where ever the planet is placed if it is the same planet having Aries navama it will behave in the same way - but don't forget to remember that the modification apply based the original result. For example, even though Sun's navamsaKA in Aries will produce the same result, as we could expect when we consider the final outcome, the intensity attibuted to "Sun placed in Aries having Aries navamsaKA" and "Sun placed in Libra having Aries Navamsaka" will not be the same. For example both may give a govt. job, but if one creates a ruler (e.g.Capton or colonel), the other will create a servent (e.g.watchman). Same applies to other results as well. Brihat Jataka uses the term "Arakshaka" (protector) indicating jobs in army, police and all to note this general result. But let us remember that the results attributed to ANOTHER PLANET e.g. Moon having Aries NavamsKA would be different. Hope I have clarified the point. Now another point to discuss is - The folowing sentence of your's creates contextual confusion.You asks - "Whather all Aries navamsa does behave in same way (because the name is same )". I hope you mean "Whather all Aries navamsaKA does behave in same way (because the name is same )". If this is the question - it is already answered above. If the question is what you ask itself, then the answer is given below - Question: Whather all Aries navamsa does behave in same way (because the name is same )? Aries sign has 9 navamsa. 1) The 1st navamsa of aries gives its navamsaKA in Aries itself. (Or in other words the first navamsaKA of Aries falls in Aries) 2) The 2nd navamsa of aries gives its navamsaKA in Taurus. (Or in other words the second navamsaKA of Aries falls in Taurus) 3) The 3rd navamsa of aries gives its navamsaKA in Gemini.

4) The 4th navamsa of aries gives its navamsaKA in Cancer. ................................. (continue like this).................. AND 9) The 9th navamsa of aries gives its navamsaKA in Sagitterious. As you could see, for each navamsa within Aries the navamsaKA (the sign/planet to which the navamsa lordship is ascribed to) differ. i.e. Each area within Aries will behave differently, and has different charecteristics - as evident from the difference in NavamsaKA sign and its lordship. Thus it is clear that "All Aries Navamsas (with in Aries) DOES NOT behave in the same way". Even though they ARE within the same sign their NavamsaKA (the sign to which that area is ascribed to) differ - and so would be the result". Results that should be ascribed to - 1) Various navamsas of every sign (for example Aries) AND 2) Planets having NavamsaKA in various signs - are given in standard texts such as Saravali, Spujidwaja hora, Brihat Jataka, Hora Ratna, Rishi horas etc. Hope I have clarified your doubt. Love and regards,Sreenadh , "Chakraborty, PL" <CHAKRABORTYP2 wrote:>> Dear Learned Seniors,> > I have few basic queries about the different Varga systems. It will be> helpful if someone guides me. If you find it too basic...just IGNORE IT.> > 1) Say, a planet posited in a sign get Aries navamsa. Does it mean that> > a) The planets original behaviour (based on its position in Rashi chart)> will be modified and it will behave somewhat like it was posited in> Aries> b) The lord of Aries (Mars) will be impacted as it is housing the planet> > Which one of the above is correct ..a) or b) or both a) & b) ?> > 2) A planet can get Aries navamsa if it is initially posited in any one of> the 9 signs (excluding watery signs). Whather all Aries navamsa does> behave in same way (because the name is same ) ? Or do they differ> in a minor or major way ?> > regards> > Chakraborty

October 12, 2009

Dear Sreenadh-ji,

Thanks a lot.

Yes, I did create confusion due to wrong usage of the terminology.

You had, on earlier occasion too, tried to correct me. But it seems

that I am a very poor student. I meant Aries Navamsaka.

regards

Chakraborty

This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

Sign In

Application of Amsas (Divisions)

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest