Fwd: [kerala_vedic_astrology] Planets - Own signs -moolatrikonas - Exaltation --Which classic is correct?

[Guest guest]

Dear Vishnu ji,

Based on a Brihat Prajapatya quote, Kaikulangara Rama varyar in his excellent

commentary of Brihat Jataka named " Hridya patha " states that -

* The WHOLE SIGN should be considered as 'Exaltation' (where ever exaltation

houses are mentioned).

* The typical word used for Maximum degree of exaltation is " Paramoccha "

(Parama Uccha = Maximum degree of exaltation) and NOT Uccha (exaltation).

Another unique point to be noted is that if some classic states that 10 degree

is maximum degree of exaltation that means that from 9.01 to 10.00 is the degree

under consideration (and NOT 10.01-11.00 or 9.30-10.30)

* The Moola Trikona concept applies to specific area of the sign only.

Swakshatra concept applies to the whole house similar to the Uccha concept. (But

since there is disagreement on this classic quotes can be referred and

discussion possible).

* The Moola Trikona concept has got numerous practical applications related to

identifying the 'Root' (Original) house or location of residence (place were

root family resided, or the place of origin of the temple or original location

of the deity or so).

If my memory is correct, some Raha yogas based on Moola Trikona concept is

provided by Saravali as well. So there also it is useful. There could be many

other applications as well.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

kerala_vedic_astrology , Vishnu Mohan <vishnumohanalj

wrote:

 

Dear Sureshji

 

Thanks for referring and letting us know what other texts say-

 

'///Saravali = 0-5

 

Hara Sara qoutes a verse supposed to be kalyana varma (Saravali) which gives

=0-15'''//

 

One of them in the above is  a typo -May i know which is correct according to

saravali?

 

 

///I could check if any other classical works has it.///

 

Thank you.shall wait some more time.

 

Nice to know that Kerala astrologers accept 0-5.

 

Is there any clue from prasna texts?

 

Thanks and best wishes

 

vishnu

 

--- On Fri, 11/27/09, Suresh Babu.A.G <sureshbabuag wrote:

 

Suresh Babu.A.G <sureshbabuag

Re: [kerala_vedic_astrology] Planets - Own signs -moolatrikonas -

Exaltation --Which classic is correct?

kerala_vedic_astrology

Friday, November 27, 2009, 10:20 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Vishnu,

 

 

 

As you said, there are a few variations in the matter moola trikona.

 

Moolatrikona of Venus

 

Parashara=0- 15

 

Shambhu Hora = 0-15

 

Sarvartha Chinthamani = Thula(does not asign specific portions)

 

The commentator might have quoted the specific degrees from elsewhere).

 

Jataka Parijata = silent (only gives portions for Moon, Mars & Mercury)

 

Yavana Jataka= Thula(does not asign specific portions)

 

Jatakadesha =0-5

 

Saravali = 0-5

 

Hara Sara qoutes a verse supposed to be kalyana varma (Saravali) which gives

=0-15.

 

 

 

I have all these books & more.

 

 

 

However, Shree Harijayandan Namboothiri has commented that most acceptable

(kerala) is 0-5.

 

Shaunaka Hora does not assign any specific portions.

 

 

 

I could check if any other classical works has it. The difficulty is to find

it. At times it may be hidden in verses in some other portion, which even the

commentators may not have understood correctly.

 

 

 

In normal cases every astrologer usualy judges superficialy. It is only when one

prods further, that he may look closely.

 

  

 

However such things are very important in computation of shadbalas, Ayush Ganana

etc.

 

 

 

Hope this clears your doubt.

 

A.G.Suresh Babu Shenoy

 

 

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

Vishnu <vishnumohanalj@ >

 

kerala_vedic_ astrology

 

Fri, November 27, 2009 5:31:28 AM

 

[kerala_vedic_ astrology] Planets - Own signs -moolatrikonas -

Exaltation --Which classic is correct?

 

 

 

 

 

Dear list

 

 

 

There is some difference between classical authors when dividing the rasis into

own signs,moolatrikona and exaltation points

 

 

 

To cite an example,Whenever we see Sun in simha we always say sun is in his own

house.same way when we see moon in taurus ,we always say it is exalted

 

 

 

DO we ever bother to see whether it is in moolatrikona? Here " we " refers to most

of the astrologers in internet,print media.There are very few who know the

correct usage of this and they are exceptions.

 

 

 

Of course,software writers take into consideration the moolatrikona, own house

etc as they need it to calcualte the " balas "

 

 

 

I would like to know which classic they follow and also which classic i should

follow for correct results?

 

 

 

Just to cite an example,

 

 

 

For venus

 

 

 

phaladeepika says

 

 

 

Libra 0-5 is moolatrikona

 

 

 

libra 6-30 is Own house

 

 

 

BPHS says

 

 

 

Libra 0-15 is moolatrikona

 

 

 

libra 16-30 is own house

 

 

 

Subramanya shastri in his notes for translation of sarvarth chintamani.I dont

think this view is from Sarvarth chintamani though.He should have taken this

from some other source i believe.

 

 

 

libra 0-10 is moolatrikona

 

 

 

Libra 11-30 is own sign

 

 

 

Similiarly for Jupiter,

 

 

 

Bphs and phaladeepika says

 

 

 

Dhanus 0-10 is moolatrikona

 

 

 

dhanus 11-30 is own house.

 

 

 

Subramanya Shastri says

 

 

 

dhanus 0-24 is moolatrikona

 

 

 

Dhanus 25-30 is own house

 

 

 

Even if we can ignore the subramanya shastri's data for Jupiter which still

makes a big difference,we cannot leave venus and thula for granted.

 

 

 

As for example,dasa of venus being in moolatrikona and being in own sign gives

different results according to Sarvarth chintamani.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, since i dont have the other classics with me now,i am unable to

refer them.

 

 

 

Clarification and suggestions are welcome.

 

 

 

I hope Sureshji will be able to help me in finding the correct value for the

planets.

 

 

 

Thanks and best wishes

 

 

 

vishnu

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

///The Moola Trikona concept has got numerous practical applications related to identifying the 'Root' (Original) house or location of residence (place were root family resided, or the place of origin of the temple or original location of the deity or so). If my memory is correct, some Raha yogas based on Moola Trikona concept is provided by Saravali as well. So there also it is useful. There could be many other applications as well///This is very interesting.A similiar topic was brought in Kerala vedic astrology forum -Determining the direction of native future spouse.We did not use

any moolatrikona concept in that,Would like to Know how moolatrikona concept(being a constant) is used practically to find such things.Thanks and .best wishesvishnu--- On Mon, 11/30/09, sreesog <sreesog wrote:sreesog <sreesog Fwd: Re: [kerala_vedic_astrology] Planets - Own signs -moolatrikonas - Exaltation --Which classic is correct? Date: Monday, November 30, 2009, 6:12 AM

 

 

Dear Vishnu ji,

Based on a Brihat Prajapatya quote, Kaikulangara Rama varyar in his excellent commentary of Brihat Jataka named "Hridya patha" states that -

* The WHOLE SIGN should be considered as 'Exaltation' (where ever exaltation houses are mentioned).

* The typical word used for Maximum degree of exaltation is "Paramoccha" (Parama Uccha = Maximum degree of exaltation) and NOT Uccha (exaltation) . Another unique point to be noted is that if some classic states that 10 degree is maximum degree of exaltation that means that from 9.01 to 10.00 is the degree under consideration (and NOT 10.01-11.00 or 9.30-10.30)

* The Moola Trikona concept applies to specific area of the sign only. Swakshatra concept applies to the whole house similar to the Uccha concept. (But since there is disagreement on this classic quotes can be referred and discussion possible).

* The Moola Trikona concept has got numerous practical applications related to identifying the 'Root' (Original) house or location of residence (place were root family resided, or the place of origin of the temple or original location of the deity or so).

If my memory is correct, some Raha yogas based on Moola Trikona concept is provided by Saravali as well. So there also it is useful. There could be many other applications as well.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

kerala_vedic_ astrology, Vishnu Mohan <vishnumohanalj@ ...> wrote:

 

Dear Sureshji

 

Thanks for referring and letting us know what other texts say-

 

'///Saravali = 0-5

 

Hara Sara qoutes a verse supposed to be kalyana varma (Saravali) which gives =0-15'''//

 

One of them in the above is  a typo -May i know which is correct according to saravali?

 

///I could check if any other classical works has it.///

 

Thank you.shall wait some more time.

 

Nice to know that Kerala astrologers accept 0-5.

 

Is there any clue from prasna texts?

 

Thanks and best wishes

 

vishnu

 

--- On Fri, 11/27/09, Suresh Babu.A.G <sureshbabuag@ ...> wrote:

 

Suresh Babu.A.G <sureshbabuag@ ...>

Re: [kerala_vedic_ astrology] Planets - Own signs -moolatrikonas - Exaltation --Which classic is correct?

kerala_vedic_ astrology

Friday, November 27, 2009, 10:20 AM

 

Â

 

Dear Vishnu,

 

As you said, there are a few variations in the matter moola trikona.

 

Moolatrikona of Venus

 

Parashara=0- 15

 

Shambhu Hora = 0-15

 

Sarvartha Chinthamani = Thula(does not asign specific portions)

 

The commentator might have quoted the specific degrees from elsewhere).

 

Jataka Parijata = silent (only gives portions for Moon, Mars & Mercury)

 

Yavana Jataka= Thula(does not asign specific portions)

 

Jatakadesha =0-5

 

Saravali = 0-5

 

Hara Sara qoutes a verse supposed to be kalyana varma (Saravali) which gives =0-15.

 

I have all these books & more.

 

However, Shree Harijayandan Namboothiri has commented that most acceptable (kerala) is 0-5.

 

Shaunaka Hora does not assign any specific portions.

 

I could check if any other classical works has it. The difficulty is to find it. At times it may be hidden in verses in some other portion, which even the commentators may not have understood correctly.

 

In normal cases every astrologer usualy judges superficialy. It is only when one prods further, that he may look closely.

 

 Â

 

However such things are very important in computation of shadbalas, Ayush Ganana etc.

 

Hope this clears your doubt.

 

A.G.Suresh Babu Shenoy

 

____________ _________ _________ __

 

Vishnu <vishnumohanalj@ >

 

kerala_vedic_ astrology

 

Fri, November 27, 2009 5:31:28 AM

 

[kerala_vedic_ astrology] Planets - Own signs -moolatrikonas - Exaltation --Which classic is correct?

 

Â

 

Dear list

 

There is some difference between classical authors when dividing the rasis into own signs,moolatrikona and exaltation points

 

To cite an example,Whenever we see Sun in simha we always say sun is in his own house.same way when we see moon in taurus ,we always say it is exalted

 

DO we ever bother to see whether it is in moolatrikona? Here "we" refers to most of the astrologers in internet,print media.There are very few who know the correct usage of this and they are exceptions.

 

Of course,software writers take into consideration the moolatrikona, own house etc as they need it to calcualte the "balas"

 

I would like to know which classic they follow and also which classic i should follow for correct results?

 

Just to cite an example,

 

For venus

 

phaladeepika says

 

Libra 0-5 is moolatrikona

 

libra 6-30 is Own house

 

BPHS says

 

Libra 0-15 is moolatrikona

 

libra 16-30 is own house

 

Subramanya shastri in his notes for translation of sarvarth chintamani.I dont think this view is from Sarvarth chintamani though.He should have taken this from some other source i believe.

 

libra 0-10 is moolatrikona

 

Libra 11-30 is own sign

 

Similiarly for Jupiter,

 

Bphs and phaladeepika says

 

Dhanus 0-10 is moolatrikona

 

dhanus 11-30 is own house.

 

Subramanya Shastri says

 

dhanus 0-24 is moolatrikona

 

Dhanus 25-30 is own house

 

Even if we can ignore the subramanya shastri's data for Jupiter which still makes a big difference,we cannot leave venus and thula for granted.

 

As for example,dasa of venus being in moolatrikona and being in own sign gives different results according to Sarvarth chintamani.

 

Unfortunately, since i dont have the other classics with me now,i am unable to refer them.

 

Clarification and suggestions are welcome.

 

I hope Sureshji will be able to help me in finding the correct value for the planets.

 

Thanks and best wishes

 

vishnu