Guest guest Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 khanna no 4.''RAHU KETU GHAR CHATHE ME PAAP SE HARDAM DARTE HAIN; TAREN KHWAH NA TAREN KASAM PAAP SE KARTE HAIN;; GRAH CHAUTHE KE RAAT KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB KARTA AA TARE CWAH BUDHAPE MEIN'' why do we recommend that andharata tewa native should not begin any auspicious work at night. kulbir bains - -- In , " cptyagi2007 " <cptyagi2007 wrote: > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > We never question the karakatwa assigned to various planets, or the > dasha years assigned to them because they are basic tenets accepted > by all over centuries. There are hundreds of such tenets in > astrology which are accepted by all. We accept them too. > > What we critically examine are the statements or interpretations > made by any author, be it Pandit ji, or any other author for that > matter. > > Now coming to your specific question: Mars or Venus karakatwa is > universally accepted and no dispute over that. It is one of those > accepted tenets. No astrologer has ever claimed the karakatwa of > wife for Mars. > > As to why the vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu, the answer is > simple. The vinshottari dasha system is based on Nakshatra , or the > movement of the moon across the zodiac. > Ketu is the Lord of three nakshatras : Ashwin , Magha and Mool , > again an accepted tenet of astrology. Since Ashwin is the first > nakshatra in Aries, where the zodiac begins and the Ketu is its > lord, therefore the sequence of vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu. > > Regards, > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > respected tyagi ji; i appreciate your scientific temper but some > things > > have to be taken as they are; e.g in vedic astrolohy also what is > the > > logic that mars is the karaka of brother and venus of spouse. why > does > > the mahadasa always start from ketu always. kindly show me the path > > also. > > kulbir bains > > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > We as a small group of Lal Kitab learners based in Aligarh are > not > > > awed by an unnecessary aura created about the book. To us it is > yet > > > another book of Indian vedic jyotish; nothing sacrosanct or > > > mystifying about it. > > > > > > As for understanding what is written in the book, it is in black > and > > > white, for every one to read and understand according to his > ability. > > > > > > In any appreciation of a book or its contents one must always > try to > > > find the logic in what is written and why it is written. One can > not > > > wear blinkers and accept every thing simply because it is said > in a > > > book. > > > > > > Every thing should be brought under rational scrutiny; that is > the > > scientific temper. > > > > > > We do not tread upon the beaten path; if necessary pave a path of > > > our own. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > kulbirbains@ wrote: > > > > > > > > with due respect tyagi ji please refer to the opening lines of > > > > gutka .............ISHARE SE HI BAAT KAR KE HAAL, SAB PADHWA > GAYA; > > > > DO CHAPE THE HISSE PEHLE, EK YEH BANWA GAYA. > > > > is janam me bas yahi pata chal jaye ki is granth me likha KYA > hai > > > > KAAFI hai. KYON likha hai bahut duur ki baat hai. > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > bains-- > > > > - In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > Once again, I didn't use the word theory, nor even the word > > > > > hypothesis, a step lower. > > > > > > > > > > I said that it is my 'assumption'. > > > > > > > > > > At the beginning of any discussions we always come up > > > > > with 'assumptions'>>> leading to hypothesis >>>.leading to > > > theory > > > > > after the hypothesis is varified on all counts. > > > > > > > > > > Fine. > > > > > > > > > > My assumption could be wrong, but then some one has to come > out > > > > with > > > > > some thing more tangible, lets say a hypothesis. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > guruji the aspect theory is also dismissed because sooraj 8 > > > > > chandra > > > > > > 2; chandra ka phal chandr ki nisf miyad yani 12 saal tak > > > sooraj > > > > ke > > > > > > neeche daba rahne ke baad alahda aur sooraj ki tarah uttam > > > hoga. > > > > > > which results in quarrels with women , defaet and loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > bains - > > > > > > -- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is interesting that these lines have been dropped from > > > the > > > > > 1952 > > > > > > > edition which is more exhaustive and enlarged than the > > > Gutaka > > > > of > > > > > > > 1941. Why did Pandit ji not mention these lines, in the > > > > context > > > > > of > > > > > > > the 2nd house, is an enigma. May be he did not feel it > > > > important > > > > > > > enough or worth mentioning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That apart lets get back to business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have rightly guessed these lines are not related > to > > > > > > placement > > > > > > > of the planets in the 2nd house. They are related to the > > > > aspect > > > > > of > > > > > > > these planets on the second house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now where would the planets be placed so that they can > > > aspect > > > > > the > > > > > > > 2nd house? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simple, in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the planets in the 8th that can look back and have > an > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > on the 2nd house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well so far so good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But why would ‘ravi’ stay aloof and not aspect > > the 2nd > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the rays of the sun go forward and can not turn > around > > > > and > > > > > > > look back, therefore the Sun would not be able to look > back > > > at > > > > > the > > > > > > > 2nd house if placed in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it make any sense to you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the book is talking about the aspect of the > > > planets > > > > on > > > > > > the > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > house. May be you could carry on from here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " waxpol " > > > > <waxpol@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honourable Kulbir ji & all Gurus, > > > > > > > > > A phrase of Gutka Pakka Gher Khanna 2 is > > > > > > > > > " aath grah is gher me aatey ,juda ravi par rehta > hey. " > > > > > > > > > How is it possible? So confusing ! Because exilement > > > > > of Sun > > > > > > > > > from this house can not fulfil the condition of 8 > > > planets > > > > in > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > due to the principle of face to face placement of > > > Dragon's > > > > > > Head > > > > > > > & > > > > > > > > > Tail.It is impossible.only seven planets can be > seated > > > in > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > What should be decoding of this phrase or how will > you > > > > > > enthrill > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > this puzzle -stone ?I am unable to enlink with > principle > > > > of > > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > Head & Tail.Would you like to explain?All other > astros > > > are > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > invited to enlighten. > > > > > > > > > With due respect > > > > > > > > > Niti > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 Dear Kulbir bhai, What do you think could have been the reason for such an advice, not to take any important decision at night? It appears you do not seem to be convinced by the reasons given by Pt. Lalkitabee ji. Incidentally, andharata teva has nothing to do with Rahu Ketu in the 4th house. The combination for andhrata teva given in the book is : sun in the 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house. { saturn aspecting the sun in the 4th } I wonder how you have co-related rahu and ketu in the 4th with andhrata teva. Regards, Varun Trivedi , " kulbirbains " <kulbirbains wrote: > > khanna no 4.''RAHU KETU GHAR CHATHE ME PAAP SE HARDAM DARTE HAIN; > TAREN KHWAH NA TAREN KASAM PAAP SE KARTE HAIN;; GRAH CHAUTHE KE RAAT > KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB KARTA AA > TARE CWAH BUDHAPE MEIN'' > why do we recommend that andharata tewa native should not begin any > auspicious work at night. > kulbir bains - > -- In , " cptyagi2007 " > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > We never question the karakatwa assigned to various planets, or > the > > dasha years assigned to them because they are basic tenets > accepted > > by all over centuries. There are hundreds of such tenets in > > astrology which are accepted by all. We accept them too. > > > > What we critically examine are the statements or interpretations > > made by any author, be it Pandit ji, or any other author for that > > matter. > > > > Now coming to your specific question: Mars or Venus karakatwa is > > universally accepted and no dispute over that. It is one of those > > accepted tenets. No astrologer has ever claimed the karakatwa of > > wife for Mars. > > > > As to why the vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu, the answer is > > simple. The vinshottari dasha system is based on Nakshatra , or > the > > movement of the moon across the zodiac. > > Ketu is the Lord of three nakshatras : Ashwin , Magha and Mool , > > again an accepted tenet of astrology. Since Ashwin is the first > > nakshatra in Aries, where the zodiac begins and the Ketu is its > > lord, therefore the sequence of vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu. > > > > Regards, > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > respected tyagi ji; i appreciate your scientific temper but some > > things > > > have to be taken as they are; e.g in vedic astrolohy also what > is > > the > > > logic that mars is the karaka of brother and venus of spouse. > why > > does > > > the mahadasa always start from ketu always. kindly show me the > path > > > also. > > > kulbir bains > > > > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > We as a small group of Lal Kitab learners based in Aligarh are > > not > > > > awed by an unnecessary aura created about the book. To us it > is > > yet > > > > another book of Indian vedic jyotish; nothing sacrosanct or > > > > mystifying about it. > > > > > > > > As for understanding what is written in the book, it is in > black > > and > > > > white, for every one to read and understand according to his > > ability. > > > > > > > > In any appreciation of a book or its contents one must always > > try to > > > > find the logic in what is written and why it is written. One > can > > not > > > > wear blinkers and accept every thing simply because it is said > > in a > > > > book. > > > > > > > > Every thing should be brought under rational scrutiny; that is > > the > > > scientific temper. > > > > > > > > We do not tread upon the beaten path; if necessary pave a path > of > > > > our own. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > kulbirbains@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > with due respect tyagi ji please refer to the opening lines > of > > > > > gutka .............ISHARE SE HI BAAT KAR KE HAAL, SAB PADHWA > > GAYA; > > > > > DO CHAPE THE HISSE PEHLE, EK YEH BANWA GAYA. > > > > > is janam me bas yahi pata chal jaye ki is granth me likha > KYA > > hai > > > > > KAAFI hai. KYON likha hai bahut duur ki baat hai. > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > bains-- > > > > > - In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > Once again, I didn't use the word theory, nor even the word > > > > > > hypothesis, a step lower. > > > > > > > > > > > > I said that it is my 'assumption'. > > > > > > > > > > > > At the beginning of any discussions we always come up > > > > > > with 'assumptions'>>> leading to hypothesis >>>.leading to > > > > theory > > > > > > after the hypothesis is varified on all counts. > > > > > > > > > > > > Fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption could be wrong, but then some one has to > come > > out > > > > > with > > > > > > some thing more tangible, lets say a hypothesis. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guruji the aspect theory is also dismissed because > sooraj 8 > > > > > > chandra > > > > > > > 2; chandra ka phal chandr ki nisf miyad yani 12 saal tak > > > > sooraj > > > > > ke > > > > > > > neeche daba rahne ke baad alahda aur sooraj ki tarah > uttam > > > > hoga. > > > > > > > which results in quarrels with women , defaet and loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > > bains - > > > > > > > -- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is interesting that these lines have been dropped > from > > > > the > > > > > > 1952 > > > > > > > > edition which is more exhaustive and enlarged than the > > > > Gutaka > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 1941. Why did Pandit ji not mention these lines, in the > > > > > context > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > the 2nd house, is an enigma. May be he did not feel it > > > > > important > > > > > > > > enough or worth mentioning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That apart lets get back to business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have rightly guessed these lines are not > related > > to > > > > > > > placement > > > > > > > > of the planets in the 2nd house. They are related to > the > > > > > aspect > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > these planets on the second house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now where would the planets be placed so that they can > > > > aspect > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 2nd house? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simple, in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the planets in the 8th that can look back and > have > > an > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > on the 2nd house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well so far so good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But why would ‘ravi’ stay aloof and not aspect > > > the 2nd > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the rays of the sun go forward and can not turn > > around > > > > > and > > > > > > > > look back, therefore the Sun would not be able to look > > back > > > > at > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 2nd house if placed in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it make any sense to you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the book is talking about the aspect of the > > > > planets > > > > > on > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > house. May be you could carry on from here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , " waxpol " > > > > > <waxpol@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honourable Kulbir ji & all Gurus, > > > > > > > > > > A phrase of Gutka Pakka Gher Khanna 2 is > > > > > > > > > > " aath grah is gher me aatey ,juda ravi par rehta > > hey. " > > > > > > > > > > How is it possible? So confusing ! Because > exilement > > > > > > of Sun > > > > > > > > > > from this house can not fulfil the condition of 8 > > > > planets > > > > > in > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > due to the principle of face to face placement of > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > Head > > > > > > > > & > > > > > > > > > > Tail.It is impossible.only seven planets can be > > seated > > > > in > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > What should be decoding of this phrase or how will > > you > > > > > > > enthrill > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > this puzzle -stone ?I am unable to enlink with > > principle > > > > > of > > > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > > Head & Tail.Would you like to explain?All other > > astros > > > > are > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > invited to enlighten. > > > > > > > > > > With due respect > > > > > > > > > > Niti > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 sir, u take it wrong i hold pt. VIPIN SHUKLA in very high esteem ; what i was confused about is the point that agar chauthe ke grah raat mein jagte han aur musibat me madad karte hain to yey pabandi kyon; being a beginer i couldn't get a convincing resoning that's why i posted this message. may be i should have struck to only relevant lines. nothing to do with rahu and ketu; only the property of planets posited in 4th house. kulbir bains , " varun_trvd " <varun_trvd wrote: > > Dear Kulbir bhai, > > What do you think could have been the reason for such an advice, not > to take any important decision at night? It appears you do not seem > to be convinced by the reasons given by Pt. Lalkitabee ji. > > Incidentally, andharata teva has nothing to do with Rahu Ketu in the > 4th house. > > The combination for andhrata teva given in the book is : sun in the > 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house. { saturn aspecting the > sun in the 4th } > > I wonder how you have co-related rahu and ketu in the 4th with > andhrata teva. > > Regards, > > Varun Trivedi > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > khanna no 4.''RAHU KETU GHAR CHATHE ME PAAP SE HARDAM DARTE HAIN; > > TAREN KHWAH NA TAREN KASAM PAAP SE KARTE HAIN;; GRAH CHAUTHE KE > RAAT > > KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB KARTA AA > > TARE CWAH BUDHAPE MEIN'' > > why do we recommend that andharata tewa native should not begin > any > > auspicious work at night. > > kulbir > bains - > > -- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > We never question the karakatwa assigned to various planets, or > > the > > > dasha years assigned to them because they are basic tenets > > accepted > > > by all over centuries. There are hundreds of such tenets in > > > astrology which are accepted by all. We accept them too. > > > > > > What we critically examine are the statements or interpretations > > > made by any author, be it Pandit ji, or any other author for > that > > > matter. > > > > > > Now coming to your specific question: Mars or Venus karakatwa is > > > universally accepted and no dispute over that. It is one of > those > > > accepted tenets. No astrologer has ever claimed the karakatwa > of > > > wife for Mars. > > > > > > As to why the vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu, the answer is > > > simple. The vinshottari dasha system is based on Nakshatra , or > > the > > > movement of the moon across the zodiac. > > > Ketu is the Lord of three nakshatras : Ashwin , Magha and > Mool , > > > again an accepted tenet of astrology. Since Ashwin is the first > > > nakshatra in Aries, where the zodiac begins and the Ketu is its > > > lord, therefore the sequence of vinshottari dasha starts with > Ketu. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > respected tyagi ji; i appreciate your scientific temper but > some > > > things > > > > have to be taken as they are; e.g in vedic astrolohy also what > > is > > > the > > > > logic that mars is the karaka of brother and venus of spouse. > > why > > > does > > > > the mahadasa always start from ketu always. kindly show me the > > path > > > > also. > > > > kulbir bains > > > > > > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > We as a small group of Lal Kitab learners based in Aligarh > are > > > not > > > > > awed by an unnecessary aura created about the book. To us it > > is > > > yet > > > > > another book of Indian vedic jyotish; nothing sacrosanct or > > > > > mystifying about it. > > > > > > > > > > As for understanding what is written in the book, it is in > > black > > > and > > > > > white, for every one to read and understand according to his > > > ability. > > > > > > > > > > In any appreciation of a book or its contents one must > always > > > try to > > > > > find the logic in what is written and why it is written. One > > can > > > not > > > > > wear blinkers and accept every thing simply because it is > said > > > in a > > > > > book. > > > > > > > > > > Every thing should be brought under rational scrutiny; that > is > > > the > > > > scientific temper. > > > > > > > > > > We do not tread upon the beaten path; if necessary pave a > path > > of > > > > > our own. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > kulbirbains@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > with due respect tyagi ji please refer to the opening > lines > > of > > > > > > gutka .............ISHARE SE HI BAAT KAR KE HAAL, SAB > PADHWA > > > GAYA; > > > > > > DO CHAPE THE HISSE PEHLE, EK YEH BANWA GAYA. > > > > > > is janam me bas yahi pata chal jaye ki is granth me likha > > KYA > > > hai > > > > > > KAAFI hai. KYON likha hai bahut duur ki baat hai. > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > bains-- > > > > > > - In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once again, I didn't use the word theory, nor even the > word > > > > > > > hypothesis, a step lower. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said that it is my 'assumption'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the beginning of any discussions we always come up > > > > > > > with 'assumptions'>>> leading to hypothesis >>>.leading > to > > > > > theory > > > > > > > after the hypothesis is varified on all counts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption could be wrong, but then some one has to > > come > > > out > > > > > > with > > > > > > > some thing more tangible, lets say a hypothesis. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guruji the aspect theory is also dismissed because > > sooraj 8 > > > > > > > chandra > > > > > > > > 2; chandra ka phal chandr ki nisf miyad yani 12 saal > tak > > > > > sooraj > > > > > > ke > > > > > > > > neeche daba rahne ke baad alahda aur sooraj ki tarah > > uttam > > > > > hoga. > > > > > > > > which results in quarrels with women , defaet and loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > > > bains - > > > > > > > > -- In > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is interesting that these lines have been dropped > > from > > > > > the > > > > > > > 1952 > > > > > > > > > edition which is more exhaustive and enlarged than > the > > > > > Gutaka > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > 1941. Why did Pandit ji not mention these lines, in > the > > > > > > context > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the 2nd house, is an enigma. May be he did not feel > it > > > > > > important > > > > > > > > > enough or worth mentioning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That apart lets get back to business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have rightly guessed these lines are not > > related > > > to > > > > > > > > placement > > > > > > > > > of the planets in the 2nd house. They are related to > > the > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > these planets on the second house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now where would the planets be placed so that they > can > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 2nd house? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simple, in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the planets in the 8th that can look back and > > have > > > an > > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > > on the 2nd house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well so far so good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But why would ‘ravi’ stay aloof and not aspect > > > > the 2nd > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the rays of the sun go forward and can not > turn > > > around > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > look back, therefore the Sun would not be able to > look > > > back > > > > > at > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 2nd house if placed in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it make any sense to you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the book is talking about the aspect of the > > > > > planets > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > house. May be you could carry on from here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > , " waxpol " > > > > > > <waxpol@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honourable Kulbir ji & all Gurus, > > > > > > > > > > > A phrase of Gutka Pakka Gher Khanna 2 is > > > > > > > > > > > " aath grah is gher me aatey ,juda ravi par rehta > > > hey. " > > > > > > > > > > > How is it possible? So confusing ! Because > > exilement > > > > > > > of Sun > > > > > > > > > > > from this house can not fulfil the condition of 8 > > > > > planets > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > due to the principle of face to face placement of > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > Head > > > > > > > > > & > > > > > > > > > > > Tail.It is impossible.only seven planets can be > > > seated > > > > > in > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > What should be decoding of this phrase or how > will > > > you > > > > > > > > enthrill > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > this puzzle -stone ?I am unable to enlink with > > > principle > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > > > Head & Tail.Would you like to explain?All other > > > astros > > > > > are > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > invited to enlighten. > > > > > > > > > > > With due respect > > > > > > > > > > > Niti > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 sir, i was mainly refering to this line GRAH CHAUTHE KE RAAT KO jAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, i hold Pt. SHUKLA JI and his opininon in very high esteem but i was confused with this line. may be i should have quoted only this line in the first place. jis tarah se aap naam ke peche bhai lagate ho i really love it. thanx kulbir bains--- In , " varun_trvd " <varun_trvd wrote: > > Dear Kulbir bhai, > > What do you think could have been the reason for such an advice, not > to take any important decision at night? It appears you do not seem > to be convinced by the reasons given by Pt. Lalkitabee ji. > > Incidentally, andharata teva has nothing to do with Rahu Ketu in the > 4th house. > > The combination for andhrata teva given in the book is : sun in the > 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house. { saturn aspecting the > sun in the 4th } > > I wonder how you have co-related rahu and ketu in the 4th with > andhrata teva. > > Regards, > > Varun Trivedi > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > khanna no 4.''RAHU KETU GHAR CHATHE ME PAAP SE HARDAM DARTE HAIN; > > TAREN KHWAH NA TAREN KASAM PAAP SE KARTE HAIN;; GRAH CHAUTHE KE > RAAT > > KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB KARTA AA > > TARE CWAH BUDHAPE MEIN'' > > why do we recommend that andharata tewa native should not begin > any > > auspicious work at night. > > kulbir > bains - > > -- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > We never question the karakatwa assigned to various planets, or > > the > > > dasha years assigned to them because they are basic tenets > > accepted > > > by all over centuries. There are hundreds of such tenets in > > > astrology which are accepted by all. We accept them too. > > > > > > What we critically examine are the statements or interpretations > > > made by any author, be it Pandit ji, or any other author for > that > > > matter. > > > > > > Now coming to your specific question: Mars or Venus karakatwa is > > > universally accepted and no dispute over that. It is one of > those > > > accepted tenets. No astrologer has ever claimed the karakatwa > of > > > wife for Mars. > > > > > > As to why the vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu, the answer is > > > simple. The vinshottari dasha system is based on Nakshatra , or > > the > > > movement of the moon across the zodiac. > > > Ketu is the Lord of three nakshatras : Ashwin , Magha and > Mool , > > > again an accepted tenet of astrology. Since Ashwin is the first > > > nakshatra in Aries, where the zodiac begins and the Ketu is its > > > lord, therefore the sequence of vinshottari dasha starts with > Ketu. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > respected tyagi ji; i appreciate your scientific temper but > some > > > things > > > > have to be taken as they are; e.g in vedic astrolohy also what > > is > > > the > > > > logic that mars is the karaka of brother and venus of spouse. > > why > > > does > > > > the mahadasa always start from ketu always. kindly show me the > > path > > > > also. > > > > kulbir bains > > > > > > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > We as a small group of Lal Kitab learners based in Aligarh > are > > > not > > > > > awed by an unnecessary aura created about the book. To us it > > is > > > yet > > > > > another book of Indian vedic jyotish; nothing sacrosanct or > > > > > mystifying about it. > > > > > > > > > > As for understanding what is written in the book, it is in > > black > > > and > > > > > white, for every one to read and understand according to his > > > ability. > > > > > > > > > > In any appreciation of a book or its contents one must > always > > > try to > > > > > find the logic in what is written and why it is written. One > > can > > > not > > > > > wear blinkers and accept every thing simply because it is > said > > > in a > > > > > book. > > > > > > > > > > Every thing should be brought under rational scrutiny; that > is > > > the > > > > scientific temper. > > > > > > > > > > We do not tread upon the beaten path; if necessary pave a > path > > of > > > > > our own. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > kulbirbains@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > with due respect tyagi ji please refer to the opening > lines > > of > > > > > > gutka .............ISHARE SE HI BAAT KAR KE HAAL, SAB > PADHWA > > > GAYA; > > > > > > DO CHAPE THE HISSE PEHLE, EK YEH BANWA GAYA. > > > > > > is janam me bas yahi pata chal jaye ki is granth me likha > > KYA > > > hai > > > > > > KAAFI hai. KYON likha hai bahut duur ki baat hai. > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > bains-- > > > > > > - In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once again, I didn't use the word theory, nor even the > word > > > > > > > hypothesis, a step lower. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said that it is my 'assumption'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the beginning of any discussions we always come up > > > > > > > with 'assumptions'>>> leading to hypothesis >>>.leading > to > > > > > theory > > > > > > > after the hypothesis is varified on all counts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption could be wrong, but then some one has to > > come > > > out > > > > > > with > > > > > > > some thing more tangible, lets say a hypothesis. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guruji the aspect theory is also dismissed because > > sooraj 8 > > > > > > > chandra > > > > > > > > 2; chandra ka phal chandr ki nisf miyad yani 12 saal > tak > > > > > sooraj > > > > > > ke > > > > > > > > neeche daba rahne ke baad alahda aur sooraj ki tarah > > uttam > > > > > hoga. > > > > > > > > which results in quarrels with women , defaet and loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > > > bains - > > > > > > > > -- In > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is interesting that these lines have been dropped > > from > > > > > the > > > > > > > 1952 > > > > > > > > > edition which is more exhaustive and enlarged than > the > > > > > Gutaka > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > 1941. Why did Pandit ji not mention these lines, in > the > > > > > > context > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the 2nd house, is an enigma. May be he did not feel > it > > > > > > important > > > > > > > > > enough or worth mentioning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That apart lets get back to business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have rightly guessed these lines are not > > related > > > to > > > > > > > > placement > > > > > > > > > of the planets in the 2nd house. They are related to > > the > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > these planets on the second house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now where would the planets be placed so that they > can > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 2nd house? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simple, in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the planets in the 8th that can look back and > > have > > > an > > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > > on the 2nd house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well so far so good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But why would ‘ravi’ stay aloof and not aspect > > > > the 2nd > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the rays of the sun go forward and can not > turn > > > around > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > look back, therefore the Sun would not be able to > look > > > back > > > > > at > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 2nd house if placed in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it make any sense to you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the book is talking about the aspect of the > > > > > planets > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > house. May be you could carry on from here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > , " waxpol " > > > > > > <waxpol@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honourable Kulbir ji & all Gurus, > > > > > > > > > > > A phrase of Gutka Pakka Gher Khanna 2 is > > > > > > > > > > > " aath grah is gher me aatey ,juda ravi par rehta > > > hey. " > > > > > > > > > > > How is it possible? So confusing ! Because > > exilement > > > > > > > of Sun > > > > > > > > > > > from this house can not fulfil the condition of 8 > > > > > planets > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > due to the principle of face to face placement of > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > Head > > > > > > > > > & > > > > > > > > > > > Tail.It is impossible.only seven planets can be > > > seated > > > > > in > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > What should be decoding of this phrase or how > will > > > you > > > > > > > > enthrill > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > this puzzle -stone ?I am unable to enlink with > > > principle > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > > > Head & Tail.Would you like to explain?All other > > > astros > > > > > are > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > invited to enlighten. > > > > > > > > > > > With due respect > > > > > > > > > > > Niti > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 Dear Kulbir bhai, There is no contradiction in what you have said through the quote ‘ghar chauthe ke raat ko jaagen’ and a planet being blinded. An awakened { jaaga hua}planet can also be blinded. Dormant { soya hua} and blinded are not synonymous. My assumption : In the andharata teva { blind by night horoscope} the sun is placed in the 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house; this is the combination. Now lets look at the sun. It is a sun at midnight, because the 4th house is midnight as the 10th is mid-noon. The sun in the darkness of midnight would already be handicapped as far as the vision is concerned. Saturn placed in the 7th is not only exalted { LK concept } it achieves dig-bal { directional strength, vedic concept}, and during the night it gets all the more powerful because it gets the kaal bal {vedic concept} When such a powerful Saturn, the lord of darkness, looks at an handicapped Sun in the 4th house { 10th aspect}, it adversely effects the vision { karakatwa of Saturn}of the Sun. The result is that the sun doesn’t have its normal power of vision, although not completely blinded. Now let’s examine the advice. The advice given is not to take any important decision at night. Earlier we have already established that at night, under the aspect of a very powerful Saturn,the vision of the sun will be blurred. Now how is the sun related to taking a decision? The Sun { tejas } is the karak of ‘vivek’ { power to discern the right from the wrong}. Therefore in effect the vivek will get blurred , hence a possibility of mistake in taking a right decision. Regards, Varun Trivedi , " kulbirbains " <kulbirbains wrote: > > sir, u take it wrong i hold pt. VIPIN SHUKLA in very high esteem ; > what i was confused about is the point that agar chauthe ke grah > raat mein jagte han aur musibat me madad karte hain to yey pabandi > kyon; being a beginer i couldn't get a convincing resoning that's > why i posted this message. may be i should have struck to only > relevant lines. nothing to do with rahu and ketu; only the property > of planets posited in 4th house. > kulbir bains > , " varun_trvd " > <varun_trvd@> wrote: > > > > Dear Kulbir bhai, > > > > What do you think could have been the reason for such an advice, > not > > to take any important decision at night? It appears you do not > seem > > to be convinced by the reasons given by Pt. Lalkitabee ji. > > > > Incidentally, andharata teva has nothing to do with Rahu Ketu in > the > > 4th house. > > > > The combination for andhrata teva given in the book is : sun in > the > > 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house. { saturn aspecting the > > sun in the 4th } > > > > I wonder how you have co-related rahu and ketu in the 4th with > > andhrata teva. > > > > Regards, > > > > Varun Trivedi > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > khanna no 4.''RAHU KETU GHAR CHATHE ME PAAP SE HARDAM DARTE > HAIN; > > > TAREN KHWAH NA TAREN KASAM PAAP SE KARTE HAIN;; GRAH CHAUTHE KE > > RAAT > > > KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB KARTA > AA > > > TARE CWAH BUDHAPE MEIN'' > > > why do we recommend that andharata tewa native should not begin > > any > > > auspicious work at night. > > > kulbir > > bains - > > > -- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > We never question the karakatwa assigned to various planets, > or > > > the > > > > dasha years assigned to them because they are basic tenets > > > accepted > > > > by all over centuries. There are hundreds of such tenets in > > > > astrology which are accepted by all. We accept them too. > > > > > > > > What we critically examine are the statements or > interpretations > > > > made by any author, be it Pandit ji, or any other author for > > that > > > > matter. > > > > > > > > Now coming to your specific question: Mars or Venus karakatwa > is > > > > universally accepted and no dispute over that. It is one of > > those > > > > accepted tenets. No astrologer has ever claimed the karakatwa > > of > > > > wife for Mars. > > > > > > > > As to why the vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu, the answer > is > > > > simple. The vinshottari dasha system is based on Nakshatra , > or > > > the > > > > movement of the moon across the zodiac. > > > > Ketu is the Lord of three nakshatras : Ashwin , Magha and > > Mool , > > > > again an accepted tenet of astrology. Since Ashwin is the > first > > > > nakshatra in Aries, where the zodiac begins and the Ketu is > its > > > > lord, therefore the sequence of vinshottari dasha starts with > > Ketu. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > respected tyagi ji; i appreciate your scientific temper but > > some > > > > things > > > > > have to be taken as they are; e.g in vedic astrolohy also > what > > > is > > > > the > > > > > logic that mars is the karaka of brother and venus of > spouse. > > > why > > > > does > > > > > the mahadasa always start from ketu always. kindly show me > the > > > path > > > > > also. > > > > > kulbir bains > > > > > > > > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > We as a small group of Lal Kitab learners based in Aligarh > > are > > > > not > > > > > > awed by an unnecessary aura created about the book. To us > it > > > is > > > > yet > > > > > > another book of Indian vedic jyotish; nothing sacrosanct or > > > > > > mystifying about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > As for understanding what is written in the book, it is in > > > black > > > > and > > > > > > white, for every one to read and understand according to > his > > > > ability. > > > > > > > > > > > > In any appreciation of a book or its contents one must > > always > > > > try to > > > > > > find the logic in what is written and why it is written. > One > > > can > > > > not > > > > > > wear blinkers and accept every thing simply because it is > > said > > > > in a > > > > > > book. > > > > > > > > > > > > Every thing should be brought under rational scrutiny; > that > > is > > > > the > > > > > scientific temper. > > > > > > > > > > > > We do not tread upon the beaten path; if necessary pave a > > path > > > of > > > > > > our own. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > kulbirbains@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with due respect tyagi ji please refer to the opening > > lines > > > of > > > > > > > gutka .............ISHARE SE HI BAAT KAR KE HAAL, SAB > > PADHWA > > > > GAYA; > > > > > > > DO CHAPE THE HISSE PEHLE, EK YEH BANWA GAYA. > > > > > > > is janam me bas yahi pata chal jaye ki is granth me > likha > > > KYA > > > > hai > > > > > > > KAAFI hai. KYON likha hai bahut duur ki baat hai. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > > bains-- > > > > > > > - In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once again, I didn't use the word theory, nor even the > > word > > > > > > > > hypothesis, a step lower. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said that it is my 'assumption'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the beginning of any discussions we always come up > > > > > > > > with 'assumptions'>>> leading to hypothesis > >>>.leading > > to > > > > > > theory > > > > > > > > after the hypothesis is varified on all counts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption could be wrong, but then some one has to > > > come > > > > out > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > some thing more tangible, lets say a hypothesis. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guruji the aspect theory is also dismissed because > > > sooraj 8 > > > > > > > > chandra > > > > > > > > > 2; chandra ka phal chandr ki nisf miyad yani 12 saal > > tak > > > > > > sooraj > > > > > > > ke > > > > > > > > > neeche daba rahne ke baad alahda aur sooraj ki tarah > > > uttam > > > > > > hoga. > > > > > > > > > which results in quarrels with women , defaet and > loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > > > > bains - > > > > > > > > > -- In > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is interesting that these lines have been > dropped > > > from > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 1952 > > > > > > > > > > edition which is more exhaustive and enlarged than > > the > > > > > > Gutaka > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 1941. Why did Pandit ji not mention these lines, > in > > the > > > > > > > context > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > the 2nd house, is an enigma. May be he did not > feel > > it > > > > > > > important > > > > > > > > > > enough or worth mentioning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That apart lets get back to business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have rightly guessed these lines are not > > > related > > > > to > > > > > > > > > placement > > > > > > > > > > of the planets in the 2nd house. They are related > to > > > the > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > these planets on the second house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now where would the planets be placed so that they > > can > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simple, in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the planets in the 8th that can look back > and > > > have > > > > an > > > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > > > on the 2nd house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well so far so good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But why would ‘ravi’ stay aloof and not aspect > > > > > the 2nd > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the rays of the sun go forward and can not > > turn > > > > around > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > look back, therefore the Sun would not be able to > > look > > > > back > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house if placed in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it make any sense to you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the book is talking about the aspect of > the > > > > > > planets > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > house. May be you could carry on from here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > , " waxpol " > > > > > > > <waxpol@> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honourable Kulbir ji & all Gurus, > > > > > > > > > > > > A phrase of Gutka Pakka Gher Khanna 2 is > > > > > > > > > > > > " aath grah is gher me aatey ,juda ravi par > rehta > > > > hey. " > > > > > > > > > > > > How is it possible? So confusing ! Because > > > exilement > > > > > > > > of Sun > > > > > > > > > > > > from this house can not fulfil the condition > of 8 > > > > > > planets > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > due to the principle of face to face placement > of > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > Head > > > > > > > > > > & > > > > > > > > > > > > Tail.It is impossible.only seven planets can > be > > > > seated > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > What should be decoding of this phrase or how > > will > > > > you > > > > > > > > > enthrill > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > this puzzle -stone ?I am unable to enlink with > > > > principle > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > > > > Head & Tail.Would you like to explain?All > other > > > > astros > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > invited to enlighten. > > > > > > > > > > > > With due respect > > > > > > > > > > > > Niti > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 Respected Kulbir jiAndhraata tevaa & awakened planets of 4th house, both have different definations in lalkitab.This question raised in ur mind due to sun in 4th in perview of ANDHRATA tevaa.Kulbir Ji Sun in 4th in ANDHRATAA TEVAA doesn't mean that sun will be sleeping or dormant in night. It may be awaken but how much helpfull for native, it depends upon its good or bad condition in tevaa.Normally all planets of this tevaa can not give proper result in night ,it doesnt mean that they will be bad absolutly. A blind man can move at right track but with hurdles due to no-vision.(that is y people say ANDHEY KE HAATH BATER LAGNAA in common language). But normally the failure rate is more before blind person.The sun will be more effected by saturn in ANDHRATAA TEVAA. It doesnt mean that it cant be beneficial ,it can be but it is not reliable that is y the remedy for Andhraataa Tevaa has been written in lalkitab.But Kulbir ji if an awakened blind or half blind claims to guide right direction in night ,how much it will be reliable ,u can understand. That is y the rule has been described in lalkitab for sun in 4th & saturn in 7th as ANDHRATAA TEVAA. If saturn may be out of 7th ,the tevaa will not be counted as handicapped. Now as per normal routine u can trust at sun of 4th, if it fulfills the conditions of goodness in 4th. This is the reason that lalkitab says about sooraj khana No. 4 :-Tamaa maayaa main kyon tu chodaa baseraa, karodon pati naam levaa jo teraa. This is special indication to the old age of native even lalkitab clearly says "Resham ke keedey ki tarah.............................santaan ke sadasya karodpati honge" . All this is as per GRAH CHAUTHE KE RAAT KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB KARTA AATARE WAH BUDHAPE MEIN''With RegardsLalkitabee V.K.SHUKLA , "varun_trvd" <varun_trvd wrote:>> Dear Kulbir bhai,> > There is no contradiction in what you have said through the > quote ‘ghar chauthe ke raat ko jaagen’ and a planet being blinded.> > An awakened { jaaga hua}planet can also be blinded. Dormant { soya > hua} and blinded are not synonymous.> > My assumption :> > In the andharata teva { blind by night horoscope} the sun is placed > in the 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house; this is the > combination.> > Now lets look at the sun.> > It is a sun at midnight, because the 4th house is midnight as the > 10th is mid-noon. The sun in the darkness of midnight would already > be handicapped as far as the vision is concerned.> Saturn placed in the 7th is not only exalted { LK concept } it > achieves dig-bal { directional strength, vedic concept}, and during > the night it gets all the more powerful because it gets the kaal bal > {vedic concept} > > When such a powerful Saturn, the lord of darkness, looks at an > handicapped Sun in the 4th house { 10th aspect}, it adversely > effects the vision { karakatwa of Saturn}of the Sun. The result is > that the sun doesn’t have its normal power of vision, although not > completely blinded.> > Now let’s examine the advice. > > The advice given is not to take any important decision at night. > > Earlier we have already established that at night, under the aspect > of a very powerful Saturn,the vision of the sun will be blurred.> > Now how is the sun related to taking a decision?> > The Sun { tejas } is the karak of ‘vivek’ { power to discern the > right from the wrong}. Therefore in effect the vivek will get > blurred , hence a possibility of mistake in taking a right decision.> > Regards,> > Varun Trivedi > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "kulbirbains" > kulbirbains@ wrote:> >> > sir, u take it wrong i hold pt. VIPIN SHUKLA in very high > esteem ; > > what i was confused about is the point that agar chauthe ke grah > > raat mein jagte han aur musibat me madad karte hain to yey pabandi > > kyon; being a beginer i couldn't get a convincing resoning that's > > why i posted this message. may be i should have struck to only > > relevant lines. nothing to do with rahu and ketu; only the > property > > of planets posited in 4th house.> > kulbir bains> > , "varun_trvd" > > <varun_trvd@> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Kulbir bhai,> > > > > > What do you think could have been the reason for such an advice, > > not > > > to take any important decision at night? It appears you do not > > seem > > > to be convinced by the reasons given by Pt. Lalkitabee ji.> > > > > > Incidentally, andharata teva has nothing to do with Rahu Ketu in > > the > > > 4th house. > > > > > > The combination for andhrata teva given in the book is : sun in > > the > > > 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house. { saturn aspecting > the > > > sun in the 4th }> > > > > > I wonder how you have co-related rahu and ketu in the 4th with > > > andhrata teva.> > > > > > Regards,> > > > > > Varun Trivedi> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "kulbirbains" > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote:> > > >> > > > khanna no 4.''RAHU KETU GHAR CHATHE ME PAAP SE HARDAM DARTE > > HAIN; > > > > TAREN KHWAH NA TAREN KASAM PAAP SE KARTE HAIN;; GRAH CHAUTHE > KE > > > RAAT > > > > KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB > KARTA > > AA > > > > TARE CWAH BUDHAPE MEIN''> > > > why do we recommend that andharata tewa native should not > begin > > > any > > > > auspicious work at night.> > > > kulbir > > > bains -> > > > -- In , "cptyagi2007" > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Dear Kulbir ji,> > > > > > > > > > We never question the karakatwa assigned to various planets, > > or > > > > the > > > > > dasha years assigned to them because they are basic tenets > > > > accepted > > > > > by all over centuries. There are hundreds of such tenets in > > > > > astrology which are accepted by all. We accept them too.> > > > > > > > > > What we critically examine are the statements or > > interpretations > > > > > made by any author, be it Pandit ji, or any other author for > > > that > > > > > matter.> > > > > > > > > > Now coming to your specific question: Mars or Venus > karakatwa > > is > > > > > universally accepted and no dispute over that. It is one of > > > those > > > > > accepted tenets. No astrologer has ever claimed the > karakatwa > > > of > > > > > wife for Mars.> > > > > > > > > > As to why the vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu, the answer > > is > > > > > simple. The vinshottari dasha system is based on Nakshatra , > > or > > > > the > > > > > movement of the moon across the zodiac.> > > > > Ketu is the Lord of three nakshatras : Ashwin , Magha and > > > Mool , > > > > > again an accepted tenet of astrology. Since Ashwin is the > > first > > > > > nakshatra in Aries, where the zodiac begins and the Ketu is > > its > > > > > lord, therefore the sequence of vinshottari dasha starts > with > > > Ketu.> > > > > > > > > > Regards,> > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "kulbirbains" > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > respected tyagi ji; i appreciate your scientific temper > but > > > some > > > > > things> > > > > > have to be taken as they are; e.g in vedic astrolohy also > > what > > > > is > > > > > the> > > > > > logic that mars is the karaka of brother and venus of > > spouse. > > > > why > > > > > does> > > > > > the mahadasa always start from ketu always. kindly show me > > the > > > > path> > > > > > also.> > > > > > kulbir bains> > > > > > > > > > > > , "cptyagi2007"> > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote:> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji,> > > > > > >> > > > > > > We as a small group of Lal Kitab learners based in > Aligarh > > > are > > > > > not> > > > > > > awed by an unnecessary aura created about the book. To > us > > it > > > > is > > > > > yet> > > > > > > another book of Indian vedic jyotish; nothing sacrosanct > or> > > > > > > mystifying about it.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > As for understanding what is written in the book, it is > in > > > > black > > > > > and> > > > > > > white, for every one to read and understand according to > > his > > > > > ability.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > In any appreciation of a book or its contents one must > > > always > > > > > try to> > > > > > > find the logic in what is written and why it is written. > > One > > > > can > > > > > not> > > > > > > wear blinkers and accept every thing simply because it > is > > > said > > > > > in a> > > > > > > book.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Every thing should be brought under rational scrutiny; > > that > > > is > > > > > the> > > > > > scientific temper.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > We do not tread upon the beaten path; if necessary pave > a > > > path > > > > of> > > > > > > our own.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Regards,> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Chandra Prakash> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > , "kulbirbains"> > > > > > > kulbirbains@ wrote:> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > with due respect tyagi ji please refer to the opening > > > lines > > > > of> > > > > > > > gutka .............ISHARE SE HI BAAT KAR KE HAAL, SAB > > > PADHWA > > > > > GAYA;> > > > > > > > DO CHAPE THE HISSE PEHLE, EK YEH BANWA GAYA.> > > > > > > > is janam me bas yahi pata chal jaye ki is granth me > > likha > > > > KYA > > > > > hai> > > > > > > > KAAFI hai. KYON likha hai bahut duur ki baat hai.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > kulbir> > > > > > > bains--> > > > > > > > - In , "cptyagi2007"> > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote:> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji,> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Once again, I didn't use the word theory, nor even > the > > > word> > > > > > > > > hypothesis, a step lower.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I said that it is my 'assumption'.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > At the beginning of any discussions we always come up> > > > > > > > > with 'assumptions'>>> leading to hypothesis > > >>>.leading > > > to> > > > > > > theory> > > > > > > > > after the hypothesis is varified on all counts.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Fine.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > My assumption could be wrong, but then some one has > to > > > > come > > > > > out> > > > > > > > with> > > > > > > > > some thing more tangible, lets say a hypothesis.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > , "kulbirbains"> > > > > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote:> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > guruji the aspect theory is also dismissed because > > > > sooraj 8> > > > > > > > > chandra> > > > > > > > > > 2; chandra ka phal chandr ki nisf miyad yani 12 > saal > > > tak> > > > > > > sooraj> > > > > > > > ke> > > > > > > > > > neeche daba rahne ke baad alahda aur sooraj ki > tarah > > > > uttam> > > > > > > hoga.> > > > > > > > > > which results in quarrels with women , defaet and > > loss.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > kulbir> > > > > > > > > bains -> > > > > > > > > > -- In > > > , "cptyagi2007"> > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote:> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji,> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > It is interesting that these lines have been > > dropped > > > > from> > > > > > > the> > > > > > > > > 1952> > > > > > > > > > > edition which is more exhaustive and enlarged > than > > > the> > > > > > > Gutaka> > > > > > > > of> > > > > > > > > > > 1941. Why did Pandit ji not mention these lines, > > in > > > the> > > > > > > > context> > > > > > > > > of> > > > > > > > > > > the 2nd house, is an enigma. May be he did not > > feel > > > it> > > > > > > > important> > > > > > > > > > > enough or worth mentioning.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > That apart lets get back to business.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > As you have rightly guessed these lines are not > > > > related > > > > > to> > > > > > > > > > placement> > > > > > > > > > > of the planets in the 2nd house. They are > related > > to > > > > the> > > > > > > > aspect> > > > > > > > > of> > > > > > > > > > > these planets on the second house.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Now where would the planets be placed so that > they > > > can> > > > > > > aspect> > > > > > > > > the> > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house?> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Simple, in the 8th.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > It is the planets in the 8th that can look back > > and > > > > have > > > > > an> > > > > > > > > > aspect> > > > > > > > > > > on the 2nd house.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Well so far so good.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > But why would ‘ravi’ stay aloof and not aspect> > > > > > the 2nd> > > > > > > > house.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > My assumption :> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Since the rays of the sun go forward and can not > > > turn > > > > > around> > > > > > > > and> > > > > > > > > > > look back, therefore the Sun would not be able > to > > > look > > > > > back> > > > > > > at> > > > > > > > > the> > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house if placed in the 8th.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense to me.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Does it make any sense to you?> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Regards,> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "cptyagi2007"> > > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji,> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I think the book is talking about the aspect > of > > the> > > > > > > planets> > > > > > > > on> > > > > > > > > > the> > > > > > > > > > > 2nd> > > > > > > > > > > > house. May be you could carry on from here.> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Regards,> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "waxpol"> > > > > > > > <waxpol@>> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Honourable Kulbir ji & all Gurus,> > > > > > > > > > > > > A phrase of Gutka Pakka Gher Khanna 2 is> > > > > > > > > > > > > "aath grah is gher me aatey ,juda ravi par > > rehta > > > > > hey."> > > > > > > > > > > > > How is it possible? So confusing ! Because > > > > exilement> > > > > > > > > of Sun> > > > > > > > > > > > > from this house can not fulfil the condition > > of 8> > > > > > > planets> > > > > > > > in> > > > > > > > > > 2nd> > > > > > > > > > > > house> > > > > > > > > > > > > due to the principle of face to face > placement > > of> > > > > > > Dragon's> > > > > > > > > > Head> > > > > > > > > > > & > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tail.It is impossible.only seven planets can > > be > > > > > seated> > > > > > > in> > > > > > > > > 2nd> > > > > > > > > > > house.> > > > > > > > > > > > > What should be decoding of this phrase or > how > > > will > > > > > you> > > > > > > > > > enthrill> > > > > > > > > > > in> > > > > > > > > > > > > this puzzle -stone ?I am unable to enlink > with > > > > > principle> > > > > > > > of> > > > > > > > > > > Dragon's> > > > > > > > > > > > > Head & Tail.Would you like to explain?All > > other > > > > > astros> > > > > > > are> > > > > > > > > > also> > > > > > > > > > > > > invited to enlighten.> > > > > > > > > > > > > With due respect> > > > > > > > > > > > > Niti> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 thanx guruji and to varun bhai also. kulbir bains --- In , " lalkitabee " <lalkitabee wrote: > > Respected Kulbir ji > Andhraata tevaa & awakened planets of 4th house, both have different > definations in lalkitab.This question raised in ur mind due to sun in > 4th in perview of ANDHRATA tevaa.Kulbir Ji Sun in 4th in ANDHRATAA TEVAA > doesn't mean that sun will be sleeping or dormant in night. It may be > awaken but how much helpfull for native, it depends upon its good or bad > condition in tevaa.Normally all planets of this tevaa can not give > proper result in night ,it doesnt mean that they will be bad absolutly. > A blind man can move at right track but with hurdles due to > no-vision.(that is y people say ANDHEY KE HAATH BATER LAGNAA in common > language). But normally the failure rate is more before blind person.The > sun will be more effected by saturn in ANDHRATAA TEVAA. It doesnt mean > that it cant be beneficial ,it can be but it is not reliable that is y > the remedy for Andhraataa Tevaa has been written in lalkitab.But Kulbir > ji if an awakened blind or half blind claims to guide right direction in > night ,how much it will be reliable ,u can understand. That is y the > rule has been described in lalkitab for sun in 4th & saturn in 7th as > ANDHRATAA TEVAA. If saturn may be out of 7th ,the tevaa will not be > counted as handicapped. Now as per normal routine u can trust at sun of > 4th, if it fulfills the conditions of goodness in 4th. This is the > reason that lalkitab says about sooraj khana No. 4 :-Tamaa maayaa main > kyon tu chodaa baseraa, karodon pati naam levaa jo teraa. This is > special indication to the old age of native even lalkitab clearly says > " Resham ke keedey ki tarah.............................santaan ke > sadasya karodpati honge " . All this is as per GRAH CHAUTHE KE RAAT KO > JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB KARTA AA > TARE WAH BUDHAPE MEIN'' > With Regards > Lalkitabee > V.K.SHUKLA > > , " varun_trvd " > <varun_trvd@> wrote: > > > > Dear Kulbir bhai, > > > > There is no contradiction in what you have said through the > > quote ‘ghar chauthe ke raat ko jaagen’ and a planet > being blinded. > > > > An awakened { jaaga hua}planet can also be blinded. Dormant { soya > > hua} and blinded are not synonymous. > > > > My assumption : > > > > In the andharata teva { blind by night horoscope} the sun is placed > > in the 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house; this is the > > combination. > > > > Now lets look at the sun. > > > > It is a sun at midnight, because the 4th house is midnight as the > > 10th is mid-noon. The sun in the darkness of midnight would already > > be handicapped as far as the vision is concerned. > > Saturn placed in the 7th is not only exalted { LK concept } it > > achieves dig-bal { directional strength, vedic concept}, and during > > the night it gets all the more powerful because it gets the kaal bal > > {vedic concept} > > > > When such a powerful Saturn, the lord of darkness, looks at an > > handicapped Sun in the 4th house { 10th aspect}, it adversely > > effects the vision { karakatwa of Saturn}of the Sun. The result is > > that the sun doesn’t have its normal power of vision, although > not > > completely blinded. > > > > Now let’s examine the advice. > > > > The advice given is not to take any important decision at night. > > > > Earlier we have already established that at night, under the aspect > > of a very powerful Saturn,the vision of the sun will be blurred. > > > > Now how is the sun related to taking a decision? > > > > The Sun { tejas } is the karak of ‘vivek’ { power to > discern the > > right from the wrong}. Therefore in effect the vivek will get > > blurred , hence a possibility of mistake in taking a right decision. > > > > Regards, > > > > Varun Trivedi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > kulbirbains@ wrote: > > > > > > sir, u take it wrong i hold pt. VIPIN SHUKLA in very high > > esteem ; > > > what i was confused about is the point that agar chauthe ke grah > > > raat mein jagte han aur musibat me madad karte hain to yey pabandi > > > kyon; being a beginer i couldn't get a convincing resoning that's > > > why i posted this message. may be i should have struck to only > > > relevant lines. nothing to do with rahu and ketu; only the > > property > > > of planets posited in 4th house. > > > kulbir bains > > > , " varun_trvd " > > > <varun_trvd@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir bhai, > > > > > > > > What do you think could have been the reason for such an advice, > > > not > > > > to take any important decision at night? It appears you do not > > > seem > > > > to be convinced by the reasons given by Pt. Lalkitabee ji. > > > > > > > > Incidentally, andharata teva has nothing to do with Rahu Ketu in > > > the > > > > 4th house. > > > > > > > > The combination for andhrata teva given in the book is : sun in > > > the > > > > 4th house and the Saturn in the 7th house. { saturn aspecting > > the > > > > sun in the 4th } > > > > > > > > I wonder how you have co-related rahu and ketu in the 4th with > > > > andhrata teva. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Varun Trivedi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > khanna no 4.''RAHU KETU GHAR CHATHE ME PAAP SE HARDAM DARTE > > > HAIN; > > > > > TAREN KHWAH NA TAREN KASAM PAAP SE KARTE HAIN;; GRAH CHAUTHE > > KE > > > > RAAT > > > > > KO JAAGEN YA JAAGEN WAH MUSIBAT MEIN, MADAD KOI NA HO JAB > > KARTA > > > AA > > > > > TARE CWAH BUDHAPE MEIN'' > > > > > why do we recommend that andharata tewa native should not > > begin > > > > any > > > > > auspicious work at night. > > > > > kulbir > > > > bains - > > > > > -- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > We never question the karakatwa assigned to various planets, > > > or > > > > > the > > > > > > dasha years assigned to them because they are basic tenets > > > > > accepted > > > > > > by all over centuries. There are hundreds of such tenets in > > > > > > astrology which are accepted by all. We accept them too. > > > > > > > > > > > > What we critically examine are the statements or > > > interpretations > > > > > > made by any author, be it Pandit ji, or any other author for > > > > that > > > > > > matter. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now coming to your specific question: Mars or Venus > > karakatwa > > > is > > > > > > universally accepted and no dispute over that. It is one of > > > > those > > > > > > accepted tenets. No astrologer has ever claimed the > > karakatwa > > > > of > > > > > > wife for Mars. > > > > > > > > > > > > As to why the vinshottari dasha starts with Ketu, the answer > > > is > > > > > > simple. The vinshottari dasha system is based on Nakshatra , > > > or > > > > > the > > > > > > movement of the moon across the zodiac. > > > > > > Ketu is the Lord of three nakshatras : Ashwin , Magha and > > > > Mool , > > > > > > again an accepted tenet of astrology. Since Ashwin is the > > > first > > > > > > nakshatra in Aries, where the zodiac begins and the Ketu is > > > its > > > > > > lord, therefore the sequence of vinshottari dasha starts > > with > > > > Ketu. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > respected tyagi ji; i appreciate your scientific temper > > but > > > > some > > > > > > things > > > > > > > have to be taken as they are; e.g in vedic astrolohy also > > > what > > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > logic that mars is the karaka of brother and venus of > > > spouse. > > > > > why > > > > > > does > > > > > > > the mahadasa always start from ketu always. kindly show me > > > the > > > > > path > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > kulbir bains > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We as a small group of Lal Kitab learners based in > > Aligarh > > > > are > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > awed by an unnecessary aura created about the book. To > > us > > > it > > > > > is > > > > > > yet > > > > > > > > another book of Indian vedic jyotish; nothing sacrosanct > > or > > > > > > > > mystifying about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As for understanding what is written in the book, it is > > in > > > > > black > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > white, for every one to read and understand according to > > > his > > > > > > ability. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In any appreciation of a book or its contents one must > > > > always > > > > > > try to > > > > > > > > find the logic in what is written and why it is written. > > > One > > > > > can > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > wear blinkers and accept every thing simply because it > > is > > > > said > > > > > > in a > > > > > > > > book. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Every thing should be brought under rational scrutiny; > > > that > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > scientific temper. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We do not tread upon the beaten path; if necessary pave > > a > > > > path > > > > > of > > > > > > > > our own. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > > > kulbirbains@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with due respect tyagi ji please refer to the opening > > > > lines > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > gutka .............ISHARE SE HI BAAT KAR KE HAAL, SAB > > > > PADHWA > > > > > > GAYA; > > > > > > > > > DO CHAPE THE HISSE PEHLE, EK YEH BANWA GAYA. > > > > > > > > > is janam me bas yahi pata chal jaye ki is granth me > > > likha > > > > > KYA > > > > > > hai > > > > > > > > > KAAFI hai. KYON likha hai bahut duur ki baat hai. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > > > > bains-- > > > > > > > > > - In , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Kulbir ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once again, I didn't use the word theory, nor even > > the > > > > word > > > > > > > > > > hypothesis, a step lower. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I said that it is my 'assumption'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the beginning of any discussions we always come up > > > > > > > > > > with 'assumptions'>>> leading to hypothesis > > > >>>.leading > > > > to > > > > > > > > theory > > > > > > > > > > after the hypothesis is varified on all counts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fine. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption could be wrong, but then some one has > > to > > > > > come > > > > > > out > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > some thing more tangible, lets say a hypothesis. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > , " kulbirbains " > > > > > > > > > > <kulbirbains@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guruji the aspect theory is also dismissed because > > > > > sooraj 8 > > > > > > > > > > chandra > > > > > > > > > > > 2; chandra ka phal chandr ki nisf miyad yani 12 > > saal > > > > tak > > > > > > > > sooraj > > > > > > > > > ke > > > > > > > > > > > neeche daba rahne ke baad alahda aur sooraj ki > > tarah > > > > > uttam > > > > > > > > hoga. > > > > > > > > > > > which results in quarrels with women , defaet and > > > loss. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kulbir > > > > > > > > > > bains - > > > > > > > > > > > -- In > > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is interesting that these lines have been > > > dropped > > > > > from > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 1952 > > > > > > > > > > > > edition which is more exhaustive and enlarged > > than > > > > the > > > > > > > > Gutaka > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 1941. Why did Pandit ji not mention these lines, > > > in > > > > the > > > > > > > > > context > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > the 2nd house, is an enigma. May be he did not > > > feel > > > > it > > > > > > > > > important > > > > > > > > > > > > enough or worth mentioning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That apart lets get back to business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have rightly guessed these lines are not > > > > > related > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > placement > > > > > > > > > > > > of the planets in the 2nd house. They are > > related > > > to > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > these planets on the second house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now where would the planets be placed so that > > they > > > > can > > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simple, in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the planets in the 8th that can look back > > > and > > > > > have > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > > > > > > on the 2nd house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well so far so good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But why would ‘ravi’ stay aloof and > not aspect > > > > > > > the 2nd > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My assumption : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the rays of the sun go forward and can not > > > > turn > > > > > > around > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > look back, therefore the Sun would not be able > > to > > > > look > > > > > > back > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 2nd house if placed in the 8th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It makes sense to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it make any sense to you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > , " cptyagi2007 " > > > > > > > > > > > > <cptyagi2007@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Niti ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the book is talking about the aspect > > of > > > the > > > > > > > > planets > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. May be you could carry on from here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra Prakash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > , " waxpol " > > > > > > > > > <waxpol@> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honourable Kulbir ji & all Gurus, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A phrase of Gutka Pakka Gher Khanna 2 is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " aath grah is gher me aatey ,juda ravi par > > > rehta > > > > > > hey. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How is it possible? So confusing ! Because > > > > > exilement > > > > > > > > > > of Sun > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from this house can not fulfil the condition > > > of 8 > > > > > > > > planets > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to the principle of face to face > > placement > > > of > > > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > > > Head > > > > > > > > > > > > & > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tail.It is impossible.only seven planets can > > > be > > > > > > seated > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What should be decoding of this phrase or > > how > > > > will > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > enthrill > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this puzzle -stone ?I am unable to enlink > > with > > > > > > principle > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > Dragon's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Head & Tail.Would you like to explain?All > > > other > > > > > > astros > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invited to enlighten. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With due respect > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Niti > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.