Guest guest Posted September 21, 2007 Report Share Posted September 21, 2007 Respected sirs, For a couple of weeks now a query, in another Lal Kitab discussion group, has gone unanswered. Could some one here answer that for all of us, please. The query is : A few doubts regarding Brihaspati-Sanichar on Page 264 of 1942 line no 3. A unique condition come across for Guru-Shani in Khana No. 2 . It says that: 'Agar Chandar bhee saath ho yaa number 8 mein se aa dekhay tau chander nashta nahin laingay' As a routine reading it looks as a normal condition. But is it pointing towards that in case of combination of Guru-Shani, if chander meets them either by aspect or Mushtarqa in other houses, shall we consider it as chander nashta. I mean that why it is written that 'chander nashta nahin laingay'. Respectfully, KP Miglani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2007 Report Share Posted September 22, 2007 Respected Miglani ji, Pt. Rupchand ji has used the word nashta, barbaad, neech and manda in the synonymous contexts. These terms are being used freely through out the book [ e.g. read page 781 of 1952 ed, a random example] Now let us analyze the Jupiter + Saturn combination. This combination makes a horoscope a dharmi teva, that apart, let us see what does Pandit ji say for this combination in the 2nd house : “ dono mushtarka se uchcha chandra uttam aur umda phal hoga†[ page 775, 1952 ed ] “ chandra ka uchcha aur umda phal denge†[ page 264, 2nd line, 1942 ed ] “ chandra ka umda aur uttam phal denge†[ page 236 line # 2 , 1941 ed ] If you notice, Pandit ji has consistently maintained that the combination of Jupiter + Saturn will give the effects of exalted moon in the 2nd house. That means this combination should, in the first place, have a moon inherent in the combination then only it will give effects of an exalted moon in the 2nd house Now let us examine why did Pandit ji consider this combination as partly representing moon? My assumption, not a theory, is that Pandit ji based his perception on the basis of Masnuyee components of these two planets. Since Moon is one of the resultant component of the masnuyee break up of these two planets, therefore Pandit ji assumed that the combination of Jupiter+ Saturn would partly act like moon. This could also be one of the reasons why Pandit ji said that this combination will be benefic in the pakka houses of Jupiter and not so in the houses where Saturn is either neech or the owner of the house. What if the moon joins the combination either through placement or through aspect; in either situation the moon component of this combination will get strengthened. Moon in the 8th house aspecting the 2nd had already been discussed earlier in the group, therefore I will not go into that. If the moon joins the combination of Jupiter + Saturn either through aspect or through placement whether chandra would be taken as not- nashta, only if the combination occurs in the 2nd house, or the dictum will be true for all the house of the horoscope. I do not think that the dictum will be true all through for all the houses. If the dictum is not true for all the houses then the question is where should chandra be taken as nashta and where as not-nashta. To my mind, chandra can be taken as ‘nashta’ in all those situations where the combination is placed in a house where the moon is considered as manda or barbaad, or neech or nashta. And houses where it is not manda etc, the moon cannot be taken as nashta. Therefore, generally speaking, if the combination of Jupiter + Saturn occurs in the houses 6,8,10,11 & 12 and if moon gets associated with the combination either through placement or through aspect, in that case chandra will be taken as nashta or manda. In the rest of the houses moon with this combination should not be taken as nashta or manda. With regards, Varun Trivedi , " kpmiglani " <kpmiglani wrote: > > Respected sirs, > > For a couple of weeks now a query, in another Lal Kitab discussion > group, has gone unanswered. Could some one here answer that for all > of us, please. > > The query is : > > A few doubts regarding Brihaspati-Sanichar on Page 264 of 1942 line > no 3. A unique condition come across for Guru-Shani in Khana No. 2 . > It says that: > 'Agar Chandar bhee saath ho yaa number 8 mein se aa dekhay tau > chander nashta nahin laingay' > > As a routine reading it looks as a normal condition. But is it > pointing towards that in case of combination of Guru-Shani, if > chander meets them either by aspect or Mushtarqa in other houses, > shall we consider it as chander nashta. I mean that why it is > written > that 'chander nashta nahin laingay'. > > Respectfully, > > KP Miglani > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2007 Report Share Posted September 23, 2007 Respected Varun ji, Thank you for your explanation. Respectfully, KP Miglani , " varun_trvd " <varun_trvd wrote: > > Respected Miglani ji, > > Pt. Rupchand ji has used the word nashta, barbaad, neech and manda > in the synonymous contexts. These terms are being used freely > through out the book [ e.g. read page 781 of 1952 ed, a random > example] > > Now let us analyze the Jupiter + Saturn combination. > > This combination makes a horoscope a dharmi teva, that apart, let us > see what does Pandit ji say for this combination in the 2nd house : > > “ dono mushtarka se uchcha chandra uttam aur umda phal hoga†[ > page 775, 1952 ed ] > > “ chandra ka uchcha aur umda phal denge†[ page 264, 2nd line, 1942 > ed ] > > “ chandra ka umda aur uttam phal denge†[ page 236 line # 2 , 1941 > ed ] > > If you notice, Pandit ji has consistently maintained that the > combination of Jupiter + Saturn will give the effects of exalted > moon in the 2nd house. > > That means this combination should, in the first place, have a moon > inherent in the combination then only it will give effects of an > exalted moon in the 2nd house > > Now let us examine why did Pandit ji consider this combination as > partly representing moon? > > My assumption, not a theory, is that Pandit ji based his perception > on the basis of Masnuyee components of these two planets. Since Moon > is one of the resultant component of the masnuyee break up of these > two planets, therefore Pandit ji assumed that the combination of > Jupiter+ Saturn would partly act like moon. > > This could also be one of the reasons why Pandit ji said that this > combination will be benefic in the pakka houses of Jupiter and not > so in the houses where Saturn is either neech or the owner of the > house. > > What if the moon joins the combination either through placement or > through aspect; in either situation the moon component of this > combination will get strengthened. Moon in the 8th house aspecting > the 2nd had already been discussed earlier in the group, therefore I > will not go into that. > > If the moon joins the combination of Jupiter + Saturn either through > aspect or through placement whether chandra would be taken as not- > nashta, only if the combination occurs in the 2nd house, or the > dictum will be true for all the house of the horoscope. I do not > think that the dictum will be true all through for all the houses. > > If the dictum is not true for all the houses then the question is > where should chandra be taken as nashta and where as not-nashta. > > To my mind, chandra can be taken as ‘nashta’ in all those situations > where the combination is placed in a house where the moon is > considered as manda or barbaad, or neech or nashta. And houses > where it is not manda etc, the moon cannot be taken as nashta. > > Therefore, generally speaking, if the combination of Jupiter + > Saturn occurs in the houses 6,8,10,11 & 12 and if moon gets > associated with the combination either through placement or through > aspect, in that case chandra will be taken as nashta or manda. > > In the rest of the houses moon with this combination should not be > taken as nashta or manda. > > With regards, > > Varun Trivedi > > > > > , " kpmiglani " > <kpmiglani@> wrote: > > > > Respected sirs, > > > > For a couple of weeks now a query, in another Lal Kitab discussion > > group, has gone unanswered. Could some one here answer that for all > > of us, please. > > > > The query is : > > > > A few doubts regarding Brihaspati-Sanichar on Page 264 of 1942 line > > no 3. A unique condition come across for Guru-Shani in Khana No. > 2 . > > It says that: > > 'Agar Chandar bhee saath ho yaa number 8 mein se aa dekhay tau > > chander nashta nahin laingay' > > > > As a routine reading it looks as a normal condition. But is it > > pointing towards that in case of combination of Guru-Shani, if > > chander meets them either by aspect or Mushtarqa in other houses, > > shall we consider it as chander nashta. I mean that why it is > > written > > that 'chander nashta nahin laingay'. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > KP Miglani > > > 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.