Guest guest Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Dear Dennis, [ 1 ] The Ashtaka Varga system is normally used as a supplementary tool to analyze a horoscope. Some people use it as their main tool for analysis too, but I do not. [ 2 ] Yes, in the ashtaka Varga system the strength of a planet is primarily ascertained through the benefic points it has obtained. Yes, the signs are not relevant in this. It is the placement of a planet relative to other planets. [ 3 ] Even otherwise allotting the points is done after the bhav- spashtha. Some allot the points according to the rasi { sign } a planet is placed in and not the Bhav { house } it is placed in. [ 4 ] Lal Kitab does not deny the existence or the relevance of any system. Yes, Lal Kitab does not use this system as such. I on the contrary do use it now and then, especially to find out the nature of a planet. At times the planet is found to be quite strong and still it doesn't give the results it should normally give. In such cases I do look up the Ashtak Varga to find out what could be wrong. [ 5 ] For the strength of the planet instead of the Ashtak Varga , I go by the shad-bal { six fold strength } system, a system most widely accepted to find out the planetary strength. [ 6 ] The aspects on any planet are already taken into account while allotting the points. Therefore it is not true to say that the aspects are not taken into consideration. [ 7 ] Yes, any planet having more than 4 benefic points is considered as strong. It is not regardless of aspects. Aspects have already been taken into account. [ 8 ] Yes, a weak benefic will give less benefic results and a strong malefic will give more malefic results. Sincerely, Priya , " Dennis " <mprgrandmaster wrote: > > Dear Priya, > My questions below are not about upayas but astrology.If you do not want to answer ,I will understand. > I have been studying Astakavarga from the lessons you put in the file section. I was strongly surprised but the claims made therin that rasi does not affect the planets placed in them but each planet is weak/malefic or strong/benefic only because of its Astakavarga power. This power is connected with the position of a planet relativle with the other planets and has nothing to do with the signs. Do I understand this correct?Do you and Lal Kitab agree with this?Also, if we use this way to estimate each plannet's power, then there is no reason to search for aspects between the planets, as if a planet has more than 4 points it is strong regardless of any other aspect .Is this true?Last but not least, the Astakavarga lessons present it as if a benefic planet is equivalent toa strong planet and the same goes for " weak " and " malefic " . I had the impressionsthat a planet can be weak with benefic effects or strong with bad effects as well. Am I wrong? > Thanks for your understanding. > Sincerely, > Dennis > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Dear Priya, I really appreciate your time and effort to help me.The only dark point is Asthakavarga for is this:if the points of a planet show us the strength of the planet, what shows whether it is benefic or malefic?Can astakavarga tell this or another system should be used to determine this? Also,I cannot find whatsofar lessons/instructions on shadbal. Do you know any online source for this?Or, could you graciously put such a file in the file section? Sincerely , Dennis , " " < wrote: > > Dear Dennis, > > > [ 1 ] The Ashtaka Varga system is normally used as a supplementary > tool to analyze a horoscope. Some people use it as their main tool > for analysis too, but I do not. > [ 2 ] Yes, in the ashtaka Varga system the strength of a planet is > primarily ascertained through the benefic points it has obtained. > Yes, the signs are not relevant in this. It is the placement of a > planet relative to other planets. > [ 3 ] Even otherwise allotting the points is done after the bhav- > spashtha. Some allot the points according to the rasi { sign } a > planet is placed in and not the Bhav { house } it is placed in. > [ 4 ] Lal Kitab does not deny the existence or the relevance of any > system. Yes, Lal Kitab does not use this system as such. I on the > contrary do use it now and then, especially to find out the nature > of a planet. At times the planet is found to be quite strong and > still it doesn't give the results it should normally give. In such > cases I do look up the Ashtak Varga to find out what could be wrong. > [ 5 ] For the strength of the planet instead of the Ashtak Varga , I > go by the shad-bal { six fold strength } system, a system most > widely accepted to find out the planetary strength. > [ 6 ] The aspects on any planet are already taken into account while > allotting the points. Therefore it is not true to say that the > aspects are not taken into consideration. > [ 7 ] Yes, any planet having more than 4 benefic points is > considered as strong. It is not regardless of aspects. Aspects have > already been taken into account. > [ 8 ] Yes, a weak benefic will give less benefic results and a > strong malefic will give more malefic results. > > Sincerely, > > Priya > > , " Dennis " > <mprgrandmaster@> wrote: > > > > Dear Priya, > > My questions below are not about upayas but astrology.If you do > not want to answer ,I will understand. > > I have been studying Astakavarga from the lessons you put in the > file section. I was strongly surprised but the claims made therin > that rasi does not affect the planets placed in them but each planet > is weak/malefic or strong/benefic only because of its Astakavarga > power. This power is connected with the position of a planet > relativle with the other planets and has nothing to do with the > signs. Do I understand this correct?Do you and Lal Kitab agree with > this?Also, if we use this way to estimate each plannet's power, then > there is no reason to search for aspects between the planets, as if > a planet has more than 4 points it is strong regardless of any other > aspect .Is this true?Last but not least, the Astakavarga lessons > present it as if a benefic planet is equivalent toa strong planet > and the same goes for " weak " and " malefic " . I had the > impressionsthat a planet can be weak with benefic effects or strong > with bad effects as well. Am I wrong? > > Thanks for your understanding. > > Sincerely, > > Dennis > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Dear Dennis, [ 1 ] In order to find out whether a planet is a benefic or malefic you have to take the help of other systems. [ 2 ] In order to find out the planet strength through Shad-bal { six fold planetary strength } and the ashtakvarga points you have to download the most efficient astrology free software { jhora } from this site: http://www.vedicastrologer.org/ Sincerely, Priya , " sahajagr19 " <mprgrandmaster wrote: > > Dear Priya, > I really appreciate your time and effort to help me.The only dark > point is Asthakavarga for is this:if the points of a planet show us > the strength of the planet, what shows whether it is benefic or > malefic?Can astakavarga tell this or another system should be used to > determine this? > Also,I cannot find whatsofar lessons/instructions on shadbal. Do you > know any online source for this?Or, could you graciously put such a > file in the file section? > Sincerely , > Dennis > , " " > <@> wrote: > > > > Dear Dennis, > > > > > > [ 1 ] The Ashtaka Varga system is normally used as a supplementary > > tool to analyze a horoscope. Some people use it as their main tool > > for analysis too, but I do not. > > [ 2 ] Yes, in the ashtaka Varga system the strength of a planet is > > primarily ascertained through the benefic points it has obtained. > > Yes, the signs are not relevant in this. It is the placement of a > > planet relative to other planets. > > [ 3 ] Even otherwise allotting the points is done after the bhav- > > spashtha. Some allot the points according to the rasi { sign } a > > planet is placed in and not the Bhav { house } it is placed in. > > [ 4 ] Lal Kitab does not deny the existence or the relevance of any > > system. Yes, Lal Kitab does not use this system as such. I on the > > contrary do use it now and then, especially to find out the nature > > of a planet. At times the planet is found to be quite strong and > > still it doesn't give the results it should normally give. In such > > cases I do look up the Ashtak Varga to find out what could be wrong. > > [ 5 ] For the strength of the planet instead of the Ashtak Varga , I > > go by the shad-bal { six fold strength } system, a system most > > widely accepted to find out the planetary strength. > > [ 6 ] The aspects on any planet are already taken into account while > > allotting the points. Therefore it is not true to say that the > > aspects are not taken into consideration. > > [ 7 ] Yes, any planet having more than 4 benefic points is > > considered as strong. It is not regardless of aspects. Aspects have > > already been taken into account. > > [ 8 ] Yes, a weak benefic will give less benefic results and a > > strong malefic will give more malefic results. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Priya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Dennis " > > <mprgrandmaster@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Priya, > > > My questions below are not about upayas but astrology.If you do > > not want to answer ,I will understand. > > > I have been studying Astakavarga from the lessons you put in the > > file section. I was strongly surprised but the claims made therin > > that rasi does not affect the planets placed in them but each planet > > is weak/malefic or strong/benefic only because of its Astakavarga > > power. This power is connected with the position of a planet > > relativle with the other planets and has nothing to do with the > > signs. Do I understand this correct?Do you and Lal Kitab agree with > > this?Also, if we use this way to estimate each plannet's power, then > > there is no reason to search for aspects between the planets, as if > > a planet has more than 4 points it is strong regardless of any other > > aspect .Is this true?Last but not least, the Astakavarga lessons > > present it as if a benefic planet is equivalent toa strong planet > > and the same goes for " weak " and " malefic " . I had the > > impressionsthat a planet can be weak with benefic effects or strong > > with bad effects as well. Am I wrong? > > > Thanks for your understanding. > > > Sincerely, > > > Dennis > > > > > > 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.