Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 Dear Chandrashekharji My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava nasha.I feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa rashis bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring such results. If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of Shadvargas as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely result. Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please demonstrate through an example -any chart. We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have Aries navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring any of these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) they are falling within Rashi chakra. Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can point to Venus and Mars having various amshas ie navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have rightly identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter any varga within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a thought from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by Mars and Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional spans,no body is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath settles down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not proper.At a time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and Shukra can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a time. w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this shloka ,it is a common problem. But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the result. '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not point to 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is having many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. Thus the translation itself is not proper. I will explaion it in another mail. Respect Pradeep , Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > Dear Pradeep, > > I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he did. I only > gave what he said. > > I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to nowhere. > > One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean Shadvarga as > is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha ruled by > Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by Atmakaraka, > how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a navamsha chakra > or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes and the other > over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. > > About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also reads what BPHS > says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad vyaye saure... " > is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is clearly brought > out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe and its > meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies a malefic > rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the word rashi > could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word Rasi means a > heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It need not every > time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. > > There are too many yogas where position of a graha in Karakamsha or > Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be taken back > to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove KNR's views at > all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide with KNR's views. > > Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a different view. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing the > > stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. > > > > In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it is > > understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the preceding > > shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. > > I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major concern. > > Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is mentioned.2) Varga > > owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a certain rashi > > results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as papa rashis > > should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some graha is > > placed or having amsha results can be predicted. > > Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri Raths > > translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos translation > > in this case. > > As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this Varga is > > navamsha. > > > > Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why did sage give > > superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly known.It > > clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from karakamsha > > rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a rashi. > > > > If some one wants to say sage is talking about shadvargas - Then > > again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be seen only > > w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. > > > > Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande shudradevatha. > > Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha(Rashi) and > > Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. > > > > Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically will be the > > question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning placement of > > planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra Ravou etc without > > specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he has no other > > way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of word > > Riksha or Rashi. > > > > Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. > > I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their position.Shri > > K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these shlokas. > > > > Respect > > Pradeep > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha produces > > passion > > > and illicit relationship " > > > > > > Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have not seen that > > > interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini sutras, I > > also > > > possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some other > > commentators) > > > to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by either Venus > > or > > > Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators say that it > > is > > > enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of the > > shadvargas. > > > To me that is strange translation as Swamsha necessarily occurs in > > > Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may be that > > amsha can > > > indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D charts. I would > > not > > > think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that could never > > occur. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has interpreted this > > > > shloka.Also i would like to see your view. > > > > > > > > Do you think technically this is possible if it is in navamsha > > (can all > > > > shadvargas fall there) > > > > > > > > SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If the 9th from > > > > Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and Kuja, he > > will be > > > > fond of others' wives. > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - Release Date: > > 6/11/2007 5:10 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2007 Report Share Posted June 23, 2007 Dear Pradeep, I would not have replied to the query had it not been from you. I hope my answer does not begin another round of uncouth comments. First, the karaka Bhava nasha does not occur when a rasi owned by a karaka happens to be in the bhava. It is the karaka itself that has to occupy the bhava for which it is karaka. My personal opinion is that Karaka bhava nasha occurs only when the karaka so occupying the bhava is strong and that it does not happen always. Perhaps the saying arose out of the way Guru and Shukra behave when occupying their karaka sthanas. I would not go into what is the correct understanding of shadvargas at this point of time, or shadabalas for that matter. But I would like to point out that as far as my little knowledge of Sanskrit goes, Varge is not plural of varga. It only means " in the Varga " . By the way, I have not understood what you mean by " Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna or other Planets " . Rasi is also one of the Shadavarga according to whatever of astrology that I have read. Has some less known text proposed otherwise? Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekharji > > My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava nasha.I > feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa rashis > bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring such > results. > > If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of Shadvargas > as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely result. > > Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna > or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please > demonstrate through an example -any chart. > > We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have Aries > navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring any of > these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) they are > falling within Rashi chakra. > > Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can point to > Venus and Mars having various amshas ie navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha > etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have rightly > identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter any varga > within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a thought > from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by Mars and > Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional spans,no body > is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath settles > down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been > mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not proper.At a > time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and Shukra > can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a time. > w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this shloka ,it > is a common problem. > But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the result. > '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not point to > 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is having > many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. > > Thus the translation itself is not proper. > > I will explaion it in another mail. > > Respect > Pradeep > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he did. I > only > > gave what he said. > > > > I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to nowhere. > > > > One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean > Shadvarga as > > is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha ruled by > > Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by > Atmakaraka, > > how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a navamsha > chakra > > or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes and the > other > > over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. > > > > About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also reads what > BPHS > > says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad vyaye > saure... " > > is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is clearly > brought > > out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe and its > > meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies a > malefic > > rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the word > rashi > > could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word Rasi means > a > > heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It need not > every > > time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. > > > > There are too many yogas where position of a graha in Karakamsha or > > Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be taken > back > > to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove KNR's > views at > > all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide with > KNR's views. > > > > Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a > different view. > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing the > > > stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. > > > > > > In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it is > > > understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the preceding > > > shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. > > > I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major concern. > > > Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is mentioned.2) > Varga > > > owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a certain > rashi > > > results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as papa > rashis > > > should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some graha is > > > placed or having amsha results can be predicted. > > > Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri Raths > > > translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos > translation > > > in this case. > > > As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this Varga is > > > navamsha. > > > > > > Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why did sage > give > > > superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly known.It > > > clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from > karakamsha > > > rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a rashi. > > > > > > If some one wants to say sage is talking about shadvargas - Then > > > again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be seen only > > > w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. > > > > > > Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande > shudradevatha. > > > Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha(Rashi) > and > > > Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. > > > > > > Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically will be > the > > > question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning placement > of > > > planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra Ravou etc > without > > > specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he has no other > > > way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of word > > > Riksha or Rashi. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. > > > I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their > position.Shri > > > K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these shlokas. > > > > > > Respect > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > <%40> > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha produces > > > passion > > > > and illicit relationship " > > > > > > > > Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have not seen > that > > > > interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini sutras, I > > > also > > > > possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some other > > > commentators) > > > > to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by either > Venus > > > or > > > > Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators say that > it > > > is > > > > enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of the > > > shadvargas. > > > > To me that is strange translation as Swamsha necessarily occurs > in > > > > Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may be that > > > amsha can > > > > indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D charts. I > would > > > not > > > > think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that could never > > > occur. > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has interpreted > this > > > > > shloka.Also i would like to see your view. > > > > > > > > > > Do you think technically this is possible if it is in navamsha > > > (can all > > > > > shadvargas fall there) > > > > > > > > > > SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If the 9th > from > > > > > Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and Kuja, he > > > will be > > > > > fond of others' wives. > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- > > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - Release > Date: > > > 6/11/2007 5:10 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 26, 2007 Report Share Posted June 26, 2007 Dear Chandrashekhar ji Thanks a lot for your kind reply and trust. Yes i have learned this from your teachings -Grahas have to be strong to give karaka bhava nasha results.Hence once i had guessed Late Saddam husseins lagna as Simha ,with exalted Surya in the 9th. The whole point in bringing this up was to say that grahas in association with rashis bring in results.If you say Venus and Mars owning 2nd from karakamsha is the meaning- Then all those individuals having Karakamsha as 1)Aries 2)Virgo 3)Meena 4)Libra will behave in such a fashion as 2nd from these are owned by either Mars/Venus. Moreover,there are nine Aries navamshas,Nine Taurus etc repeating 12 times within a Rashi of 360 degrees.And any of these can qualify for meeting our condition.Do you think it is such a general reference. On the other hand in any chart,Venus and Mars will have only one and only one navamsha/trmishamsha etc. Thus sage is talking about mars and Venus having vargas in the 2nd from karakamsha/swamsha rashis for light results and their yuti/aspects resulting in stronger results. ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe -BPHS Karakamsha Phala adhyaya'' - is talking about Karaka graha having its amsha(swamsha) in rashis starting from mesha onwards.In other words plural is meant and meanings are contextual. Here sage is talking about graha having - swamshe where? - in meshadi rashige (rashis) Similarly -Tatra -(There) Bhrigwonkaraka Varge - Mars and Venus are having Vargas. Rashi is ofcourse the first Varga.When a graha is studied w.r to one full span of a Riksha/Kshethra/Bhava it is a study about the first varga.Within this Rashi if we are studying one half influences -it becomes Hora.One ninth it becomes navamsha. But no matter whether you get aries from aries rashi or taurus rashi we have only one Aries Rashi to tudy Rashi Tulya or Transit results.Why is it so.Because amshas relate to root Rashis.On the other hand you are assuming that the mapping back is pointing to placaments -which can happen only in case of Vragottama. Hope this is clear. I was able to read BPHS sanskrit shlokas and it is surprising to note why others have difference in opinion with Raoji. I will write it as another mail. Respect Pardeep -- In , Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > Dear Pradeep, > > I would not have replied to the query had it not been from you. I hope > my answer does not begin another round of uncouth comments. > > First, the karaka Bhava nasha does not occur when a rasi owned by a > karaka happens to be in the bhava. It is the karaka itself that has to > occupy the bhava for which it is karaka. My personal opinion is that > Karaka bhava nasha occurs only when the karaka so occupying the bhava is > strong and that it does not happen always. Perhaps the saying arose out > of the way Guru and Shukra behave when occupying their karaka sthanas. > > I would not go into what is the correct understanding of shadvargas at > this point of time, or shadabalas for that matter. But I would like to > point out that as far as my little knowledge of Sanskrit goes, Varge is > not plural of varga. It only means " in the Varga " . > > By the way, I have not understood what you mean by " Basic > understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna or other > Planets " . Rasi is also one of the Shadavarga according to whatever of > astrology that I have read. Has some less known text proposed otherwise? > > Chandrashekhar. > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > Dear Chandrashekharji > > > > My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava nasha.I > > feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa rashis > > bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring such > > results. > > > > If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of Shadvargas > > as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely result. > > > > Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna > > or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please > > demonstrate through an example -any chart. > > > > We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have Aries > > navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring any of > > these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) they are > > falling within Rashi chakra. > > > > Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can point to > > Venus and Mars having various amshas ie navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha > > etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have rightly > > identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter any varga > > within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a thought > > from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by Mars and > > Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional spans,no body > > is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath settles > > down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been > > mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not proper.At a > > time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and Shukra > > can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a time. > > w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this shloka ,it > > is a common problem. > > But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the result. > > '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not point to > > 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is having > > many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. > > > > Thus the translation itself is not proper. > > > > I will explaion it in another mail. > > > > Respect > > Pradeep > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he did. I > > only > > > gave what he said. > > > > > > I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to nowhere. > > > > > > One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean > > Shadvarga as > > > is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha ruled by > > > Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by > > Atmakaraka, > > > how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a navamsha > > chakra > > > or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes and the > > other > > > over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. > > > > > > About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also reads what > > BPHS > > > says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad vyaye > > saure... " > > > is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is clearly > > brought > > > out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe and its > > > meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies a > > malefic > > > rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the word > > rashi > > > could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word Rasi means > > a > > > heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It need not > > every > > > time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. > > > > > > There are too many yogas where position of a graha in Karakamsha or > > > Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be taken > > back > > > to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove KNR's > > views at > > > all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide with > > KNR's views. > > > > > > Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a > > different view. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing the > > > > stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. > > > > > > > > In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it is > > > > understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the preceding > > > > shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. > > > > I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major concern. > > > > Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is mentioned.2) > > Varga > > > > owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a certain > > rashi > > > > results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as papa > > rashis > > > > should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some graha is > > > > placed or having amsha results can be predicted. > > > > Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri Raths > > > > translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos > > translation > > > > in this case. > > > > As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this Varga is > > > > navamsha. > > > > > > > > Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why did sage > > give > > > > superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly known.It > > > > clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from > > karakamsha > > > > rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a rashi. > > > > > > > > If some one wants to say sage is talking about shadvargas - Then > > > > again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be seen only > > > > w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. > > > > > > > > Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande > > shudradevatha. > > > > Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha (Rashi) > > and > > > > Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. > > > > > > > > Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically will be > > the > > > > question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning placement > > of > > > > planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra Ravou etc > > without > > > > specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he has no other > > > > way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of word > > > > Riksha or Rashi. > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. > > > > I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their > > position.Shri > > > > K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these shlokas. > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > > > He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha produces > > > > passion > > > > > and illicit relationship " > > > > > > > > > > Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have not seen > > that > > > > > interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini sutras, I > > > > also > > > > > possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some other > > > > commentators) > > > > > to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by either > > Venus > > > > or > > > > > Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators say that > > it > > > > is > > > > > enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of the > > > > shadvargas. > > > > > To me that is strange translation as Swamsha necessarily occurs > > in > > > > > Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may be that > > > > amsha can > > > > > indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D charts. I > > would > > > > not > > > > > think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that could never > > > > occur. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has interpreted > > this > > > > > > shloka.Also i would like to see your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think technically this is possible if it is in navamsha > > > > (can all > > > > > > shadvargas fall there) > > > > > > > > > > > > SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If the 9th > > from > > > > > > Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and Kuja, he > > > > will be > > > > > > fond of others' wives. > > > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ - > > > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - Release > > Date: > > > > 6/11/2007 5:10 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 26, 2007 Report Share Posted June 26, 2007 Dear Pradeep, If we accept your argument for the sake of argument, how do you look at Shukra or Mangal Varga in Hora chart? As to nine Aries navamsha and so on, if trouble from rats etc is accepted in all 9 of them why only in this particular case should there be an exception? If you remember, there is a dictum that Venus in the 7th makes a person libidinous. Now in that case this could happen with any lagna in a rasi chart. So does that mean the dictum itself is not to be applied in the rasi chart? Personally speaking, I do not think any of the astrological principle given is to be treated as a standalone principle that can be applied without assessing the strength of a bhava. I think I have already explained that, as far as I think, " Varge " means " in the varga of " and not " in the vargas of " . I am sure some one who is a scholar of Sanskrit may know better, but " Varge " is certainly not plural. I seriously doubt that " Meshaadi rashige Swamshe " means what you are trying to translate it to mean neither does the respected R. Santanam who has translated it to mean as " Karakamsha identical with Aries etc. " He also goes on to say in the notes that Karakamsha is the navamsha occupied by the Atma karaka. And if you care to read the next shloka it talks about " grihe mUshakamaarjaaraa meshaaMshe hyaatmakaarake " , leaving no scope for interpretation as to what Parashara meant by Karakamsha. So why you, or as you say MR. Rao, insist that Karakamsha means the Rasi occupied in rasi chart, identical to the Navamsha occupied by the Atmakaraka in navamsha, is not at all very clear. Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > Thanks a lot for your kind reply and trust. > Yes i have learned this from your teachings -Grahas have to be > strong to give karaka bhava nasha results.Hence once i had guessed > Late Saddam husseins lagna as Simha ,with exalted Surya in the 9th. > > The whole point in bringing this up was to say that grahas in > association with rashis bring in results.If you say Venus and Mars > owning 2nd from karakamsha is the meaning- Then all those > individuals having Karakamsha as > 1)Aries > 2)Virgo > 3)Meena > 4)Libra > > will behave in such a fashion as 2nd from these are owned by either > Mars/Venus. > > Moreover,there are nine Aries navamshas,Nine Taurus etc repeating 12 > times within a Rashi of 360 degrees.And any of these can qualify for > meeting our condition.Do you think it is such a general reference. > > On the other hand in any chart,Venus and Mars will have only one and > only one navamsha/trmishamsha etc. Thus sage is talking about mars > and Venus having vargas in the 2nd from karakamsha/swamsha rashis > for light results and their yuti/aspects resulting in stronger > results. > > ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe -BPHS Karakamsha Phala adhyaya'' - is > talking about Karaka graha having its amsha(swamsha) in rashis > starting from mesha onwards.In other words plural is meant and > meanings are contextual. > > Here sage is talking about graha having - swamshe where? - in > meshadi rashige (rashis) > > Similarly -Tatra -(There) Bhrigwonkaraka Varge - Mars and Venus are > having Vargas. > > Rashi is ofcourse the first Varga.When a graha is studied w.r to one > full span of a Riksha/Kshethra/Bhava it is a study about the first > varga.Within this Rashi if we are studying one half influences -it > becomes Hora.One ninth it becomes navamsha. > > But no matter whether you get aries from aries rashi or taurus rashi > we have only one Aries Rashi to tudy Rashi Tulya or Transit > results.Why is it so.Because amshas relate to root Rashis.On the > other hand you are assuming that the mapping back is pointing to > placaments -which can happen only in case of Vragottama. > > Hope this is clear. > > I was able to read BPHS sanskrit shlokas and it is surprising to > note why others have difference in opinion with Raoji. > I will write it as another mail. > > Respect > Pardeep > > -- In > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > I would not have replied to the query had it not been from you. I > hope > > my answer does not begin another round of uncouth comments. > > > > First, the karaka Bhava nasha does not occur when a rasi owned by > a > > karaka happens to be in the bhava. It is the karaka itself that > has to > > occupy the bhava for which it is karaka. My personal opinion is > that > > Karaka bhava nasha occurs only when the karaka so occupying the > bhava is > > strong and that it does not happen always. Perhaps the saying > arose out > > of the way Guru and Shukra behave when occupying their karaka > sthanas. > > > > I would not go into what is the correct understanding of > shadvargas at > > this point of time, or shadabalas for that matter. But I would > like to > > point out that as far as my little knowledge of Sanskrit goes, > Varge is > > not plural of varga. It only means " in the Varga " . > > > > By the way, I have not understood what you mean by " Basic > > understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna or > other > > Planets " . Rasi is also one of the Shadavarga according to whatever > of > > astrology that I have read. Has some less known text proposed > otherwise? > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekharji > > > > > > My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava > nasha.I > > > feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa rashis > > > bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring such > > > results. > > > > > > If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of > Shadvargas > > > as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely > result. > > > > > > Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal > Lagna > > > or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please > > > demonstrate through an example -any chart. > > > > > > We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have Aries > > > navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring > any of > > > these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) they > are > > > falling within Rashi chakra. > > > > > > Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can point to > > > Venus and Mars having various amshas ie > navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha > > > etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have rightly > > > identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter any > varga > > > within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a > thought > > > from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by Mars > and > > > Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional spans,no > body > > > is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath > settles > > > down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been > > > mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not > proper.At a > > > time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and > Shukra > > > can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a > time. > > > w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this > shloka ,it > > > is a common problem. > > > But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the result. > > > '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not > point to > > > 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is > having > > > many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. > > > > > > Thus the translation itself is not proper. > > > > > > I will explaion it in another mail. > > > > > > Respect > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > <%40> > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he > did. I > > > only > > > > gave what he said. > > > > > > > > I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to > nowhere. > > > > > > > > One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean > > > Shadvarga as > > > > is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha > ruled by > > > > Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by > > > Atmakaraka, > > > > how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a > navamsha > > > chakra > > > > or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes and > the > > > other > > > > over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. > > > > > > > > About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also reads > what > > > BPHS > > > > says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad vyaye > > > saure... " > > > > is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is clearly > > > brought > > > > out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe and > its > > > > meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies a > > > malefic > > > > rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the word > > > rashi > > > > could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word Rasi > means > > > a > > > > heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It need > not > > > every > > > > time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. > > > > > > > > There are too many yogas where position of a graha in > Karakamsha or > > > > Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be > taken > > > back > > > > to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove KNR's > > > views at > > > > all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide with > > > KNR's views. > > > > > > > > Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a > > > different view. > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing the > > > > > stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. > > > > > > > > > > In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it is > > > > > understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the > preceding > > > > > shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. > > > > > I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major > concern. > > > > > Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is > mentioned.2) > > > Varga > > > > > owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a > certain > > > rashi > > > > > results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as > papa > > > rashis > > > > > should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some > graha is > > > > > placed or having amsha results can be predicted. > > > > > Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri > Raths > > > > > translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos > > > translation > > > > > in this case. > > > > > As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this Varga is > > > > > navamsha. > > > > > > > > > > Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why did > sage > > > give > > > > > superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly > known.It > > > > > clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from > > > karakamsha > > > > > rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a > rashi. > > > > > > > > > > If some one wants to say sage is talking about shadvargas - > Then > > > > > again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be > seen only > > > > > w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. > > > > > > > > > > Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande > > > shudradevatha. > > > > > Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha > (Rashi) > > > and > > > > > Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. > > > > > > > > > > Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically > will be > > > the > > > > > question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning > placement > > > of > > > > > planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra Ravou etc > > > without > > > > > specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he has no > other > > > > > way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of > word > > > > > Riksha or Rashi. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. > > > > > I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their > > > position.Shri > > > > > K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > > > <%40> > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > > > > > He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha > produces > > > > > passion > > > > > > and illicit relationship " > > > > > > > > > > > > Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have not > seen > > > that > > > > > > interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini > sutras, I > > > > > also > > > > > > possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some other > > > > > commentators) > > > > > > to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by either > > > Venus > > > > > or > > > > > > Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators say > that > > > it > > > > > is > > > > > > enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of the > > > > > shadvargas. > > > > > > To me that is strange translation as Swamsha necessarily > occurs > > > in > > > > > > Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may be > that > > > > > amsha can > > > > > > indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D > charts. I > > > would > > > > > not > > > > > > think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that could > never > > > > > occur. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has > interpreted > > > this > > > > > > > shloka.Also i would like to see your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think technically this is possible if it is in > navamsha > > > > > (can all > > > > > > > shadvargas fall there) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If the > 9th > > > from > > > > > > > Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and > Kuja, he > > > > > will be > > > > > > > fond of others' wives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ > - > > > > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - Release > > > Date: > > > > > 6/11/2007 5:10 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2007 Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 Dear Chandrashekhar ji and Pradeep ji, So there are two likely interpretation. Would not it be better, if you both take any number of specimen charts and interpret from both the perspectives - we will know which works better and consistently; and then we may pick that one for reading the charts. regards / Prafulla Gang http://www.prafulla.net " The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously. " ************************************************ > > chandrashekhar46 > Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:10:30 +0530 > > Re: Re: Karakamsha -Chandrashekhar ji -1 > > Dear Pradeep, > > If we accept your argument for the sake of argument, how do you look at > Shukra or Mangal Varga in Hora chart? As to nine Aries navamsha and so > on, if trouble from rats etc is accepted in all 9 of them why only in > this particular case should there be an exception? > > If you remember, there is a dictum that Venus in the 7th makes a person > libidinous. Now in that case this could happen with any lagna in a rasi > chart. So does that mean the dictum itself is not to be applied in the > rasi chart? > > Personally speaking, I do not think any of the astrological principle > given is to be treated as a standalone principle that can be applied > without assessing the strength of a bhava. > > I think I have already explained that, as far as I think, " Varge " means > " in the varga of " and not " in the vargas of " . I am sure some one who is > a scholar of Sanskrit may know better, but " Varge " is certainly not > plural. > > I seriously doubt that " Meshaadi rashige Swamshe " means what you are > trying to translate it to mean neither does the respected R. Santanam > who has translated it to mean as " Karakamsha identical with Aries etc. " > He also goes on to say in the notes that Karakamsha is the navamsha > occupied by the Atma karaka. And if you care to read the next shloka it > talks about " grihe mUshakamaarjaaraa meshaaMshe hyaatmakaarake " , leaving > no scope for interpretation as to what Parashara meant by Karakamsha. So > why you, or as you say MR. Rao, insist that Karakamsha means the Rasi > occupied in rasi chart, identical to the Navamsha occupied by the > Atmakaraka in navamsha, is not at all very clear. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >> >> Dear Chandrashekhar ji >> >> Thanks a lot for your kind reply and trust. >> Yes i have learned this from your teachings -Grahas have to be >> strong to give karaka bhava nasha results.Hence once i had guessed >> Late Saddam husseins lagna as Simha ,with exalted Surya in the 9th. >> >> The whole point in bringing this up was to say that grahas in >> association with rashis bring in results.If you say Venus and Mars >> owning 2nd from karakamsha is the meaning- Then all those >> individuals having Karakamsha as >> 1)Aries >> 2)Virgo >> 3)Meena >> 4)Libra >> >> will behave in such a fashion as 2nd from these are owned by either >> Mars/Venus. >> >> Moreover,there are nine Aries navamshas,Nine Taurus etc repeating 12 >> times within a Rashi of 360 degrees.And any of these can qualify for >> meeting our condition.Do you think it is such a general reference. >> >> On the other hand in any chart,Venus and Mars will have only one and >> only one navamsha/trmishamsha etc. Thus sage is talking about mars >> and Venus having vargas in the 2nd from karakamsha/swamsha rashis >> for light results and their yuti/aspects resulting in stronger >> results. >> >> ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe -BPHS Karakamsha Phala adhyaya'' - is >> talking about Karaka graha having its amsha(swamsha) in rashis >> starting from mesha onwards.In other words plural is meant and >> meanings are contextual. >> >> Here sage is talking about graha having - swamshe where? - in >> meshadi rashige (rashis) >> >> Similarly -Tatra -(There) Bhrigwonkaraka Varge - Mars and Venus are >> having Vargas. >> >> Rashi is ofcourse the first Varga.When a graha is studied w.r to one >> full span of a Riksha/Kshethra/Bhava it is a study about the first >> varga.Within this Rashi if we are studying one half influences -it >> becomes Hora.One ninth it becomes navamsha. >> >> But no matter whether you get aries from aries rashi or taurus rashi >> we have only one Aries Rashi to tudy Rashi Tulya or Transit >> results.Why is it so.Because amshas relate to root Rashis.On the >> other hand you are assuming that the mapping back is pointing to >> placaments -which can happen only in case of Vragottama. >> >> Hope this is clear. >> >> I was able to read BPHS sanskrit shlokas and it is surprising to >> note why others have difference in opinion with Raoji. >> I will write it as another mail. >> >> Respect >> Pardeep >> >> -- In >> <%40>, Chandrashekhar >> <chandrashekhar46 wrote: >>> >>> Dear Pradeep, >>> >>> I would not have replied to the query had it not been from you. I >> hope >>> my answer does not begin another round of uncouth comments. >>> >>> First, the karaka Bhava nasha does not occur when a rasi owned by >> a >>> karaka happens to be in the bhava. It is the karaka itself that >> has to >>> occupy the bhava for which it is karaka. My personal opinion is >> that >>> Karaka bhava nasha occurs only when the karaka so occupying the >> bhava is >>> strong and that it does not happen always. Perhaps the saying >> arose out >>> of the way Guru and Shukra behave when occupying their karaka >> sthanas. >>> >>> I would not go into what is the correct understanding of >> shadvargas at >>> this point of time, or shadabalas for that matter. But I would >> like to >>> point out that as far as my little knowledge of Sanskrit goes, >> Varge is >>> not plural of varga. It only means " in the Varga " . >>> >>> By the way, I have not understood what you mean by " Basic >>> understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna or >> other >>> Planets " . Rasi is also one of the Shadavarga according to whatever >> of >>> astrology that I have read. Has some less known text proposed >> otherwise? >>> >>> Chandrashekhar. >>> >>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Chandrashekharji >>>> >>>> My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava >> nasha.I >>>> feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa rashis >>>> bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring such >>>> results. >>>> >>>> If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of >> Shadvargas >>>> as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely >> result. >>>> >>>> Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal >> Lagna >>>> or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please >>>> demonstrate through an example -any chart. >>>> >>>> We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have Aries >>>> navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring >> any of >>>> these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) they >> are >>>> falling within Rashi chakra. >>>> >>>> Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can point to >>>> Venus and Mars having various amshas ie >> navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha >>>> etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have rightly >>>> identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter any >> varga >>>> within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a >> thought >>>> from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by Mars >> and >>>> Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional spans,no >> body >>>> is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath >> settles >>>> down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been >>>> mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not >> proper.At a >>>> time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and >> Shukra >>>> can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a >> time. >>>> w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this >> shloka ,it >>>> is a common problem. >>>> But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the result. >>>> '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not >> point to >>>> 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is >> having >>>> many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. >>>> >>>> Thus the translation itself is not proper. >>>> >>>> I will explaion it in another mail. >>>> >>>> Respect >>>> Pradeep >>>> >>>> >> <%40> >>>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar >>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear Pradeep, >>>>> >>>>> I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he >> did. I >>>> only >>>>> gave what he said. >>>>> >>>>> I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to >> nowhere. >>>>> >>>>> One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean >>>> Shadvarga as >>>>> is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha >> ruled by >>>>> Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by >>>> Atmakaraka, >>>>> how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a >> navamsha >>>> chakra >>>>> or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes and >> the >>>> other >>>>> over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. >>>>> >>>>> About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also reads >> what >>>> BPHS >>>>> says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad vyaye >>>> saure... " >>>>> is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is clearly >>>> brought >>>>> out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe and >> its >>>>> meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies a >>>> malefic >>>>> rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the word >>>> rashi >>>>> could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word Rasi >> means >>>> a >>>>> heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It need >> not >>>> every >>>>> time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. >>>>> >>>>> There are too many yogas where position of a graha in >> Karakamsha or >>>>> Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be >> taken >>>> back >>>>> to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove KNR's >>>> views at >>>>> all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide with >>>> KNR's views. >>>>> >>>>> Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a >>>> different view. >>>>> >>>>> Chandrashekhar. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the explanation. >>>>>> As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing the >>>>>> stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it is >>>>>> understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the >> preceding >>>>>> shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. >>>>>> I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major >> concern. >>>>>> Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is >> mentioned.2) >>>> Varga >>>>>> owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a >> certain >>>> rashi >>>>>> results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as >> papa >>>> rashis >>>>>> should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some >> graha is >>>>>> placed or having amsha results can be predicted. >>>>>> Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri >> Raths >>>>>> translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos >>>> translation >>>>>> in this case. >>>>>> As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this Varga is >>>>>> navamsha. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why did >> sage >>>> give >>>>>> superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly >> known.It >>>>>> clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from >>>> karakamsha >>>>>> rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a >> rashi. >>>>>> >>>>>> If some one wants to say sage is talking about shadvargas - >> Then >>>>>> again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be >> seen only >>>>>> w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande >>>> shudradevatha. >>>>>> Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha >> (Rashi) >>>> and >>>>>> Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically >> will be >>>> the >>>>>> question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning >> placement >>>> of >>>>>> planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra Ravou etc >>>> without >>>>>> specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he has no >> other >>>>>> way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of >> word >>>>>> Riksha or Rashi. >>>>>> >>>>>> Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. >>>>>> I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their >>>> position.Shri >>>>>> K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these shlokas. >>>>>> >>>>>> Respect >>>>>> Pradeep >>>>>> >>>>>> >> <%40> >>>> <%40> >>>>>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar >>>>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Pradeep, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha >> produces >>>>>> passion >>>>>>> and illicit relationship " >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have not >> seen >>>> that >>>>>>> interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini >> sutras, I >>>>>> also >>>>>>> possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some other >>>>>> commentators) >>>>>>> to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by either >>>> Venus >>>>>> or >>>>>>> Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators say >> that >>>> it >>>>>> is >>>>>>> enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of the >>>>>> shadvargas. >>>>>>> To me that is strange translation as Swamsha necessarily >> occurs >>>> in >>>>>>> Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may be >> that >>>>>> amsha can >>>>>>> indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D >> charts. I >>>> would >>>>>> not >>>>>>> think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that could >> never >>>>>> occur. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chandrashekhar. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has >> interpreted >>>> this >>>>>>>> shloka.Also i would like to see your view. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Do you think technically this is possible if it is in >> navamsha >>>>>> (can all >>>>>>>> shadvargas fall there) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If the >> 9th >>>> from >>>>>>>> Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and >> Kuja, he >>>>>> will be >>>>>>>> fond of others' wives. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Respect >>>>>>>> Pradeep >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------------------ >> - >>>>>> ------ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - Release >>>> Date: >>>>>> 6/11/2007 5:10 PM >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2007 Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 Dear Chandrashekhar ji Pls find my reply. , Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > Dear Pradeep, > > If we accept your argument for the sake of argument, how do you look at > Shukra or Mangal Varga in Hora chart? As to nine Aries navamsha and so > on, if trouble from rats etc is accepted in all 9 of them why only in > this particular case should there be an exception? Pradeep: Hora is a universal problem and not specific to our example,while thinking of shadvarga and we may deal this sepeartely as another thread. > > If you remember, there is a dictum that Venus in the 7th makes a person > libidinous. Now in that case this could happen with any lagna in a rasi > chart. So does that mean the dictum itself is not to be applied in the > rasi chart? Pradeep:In this example Venus in the 7th is pointing to two things (7th bhava and a Planet).But with ''in the varga of'' explanation there is no planet - Just Lordship.It is then like for eg saying if 7th house is Libra/Taurus/Aries or Scorpio some results will come. > > Personally speaking, I do not think any of the astrological principle > given is to be treated as a standalone principle that can be applied > without assessing the strength of a bhava. > > I think I have already explained that, as far as I think, " Varge " means > " in the varga of " and not " in the vargas of " . I am sure some one who is > a scholar of Sanskrit may know better, but " Varge " is certainly not plural. Pradeep:I have never said ''in the vargas of'' - I have always said ''Vargas of''.There is a big difference.I was talking about Venus or Mars having Varga there(Not the ones lorded by them).Varge (ending with ''ay'') can have different meanings(Not always in the Varga of).For example Labh''e'' is in the 11th while Labhesh''e'' is just pointing to 11th lord. Rashige is pointing to plural - In the Rashis.Thus i feel it is contextual. > > I seriously doubt that " Meshaadi rashige Swamshe " means what you are > trying to translate it to mean neither does the respected R. Santanam > who has translated it to mean as " Karakamsha identical with Aries etc. " > He also goes on to say in the notes that Karakamsha is the navamsha > occupied by the Atma karaka. And if you care to read the next shloka it > talks about " grihe Ushakamaarjaaraa meshaaMshe hyaatmakaarake " , leaving > no scope for interpretation as to what Parashara meant by Karakamsha. So > why you, or as you say MR. Rao, insist that Karakamsha means the Rasi > occupied in rasi chart, identical to the Navamsha occupied by the > Atmakaraka in navamsha, is not at all very clear. Pradeep:Can you pls translate - Meshadi + Rashige + Swamshe (What do you think Rashige means) For me there are two possibilities for ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe'' - a)Swamsha(Karakamsha) in the Rashis from Mesha onwards b)Swamsha is a full chart with all Navamshas(K.N.Raojis view - In meshadi rashis within Swamshe).This is literally correct,but will fail with succeeding shlokas.If Swamsha is a full chart -from where do we count 10th/4th etc from Swamsha references.Thus swamsha is Karaka Grahas amsha(Swa -His,Amsha). I assume Raoji had Navamsha as a full chart in mind.Similarly Late Santhanam could not interpret the Lagna Shadvargake Shloka as the scholar some how misunderstood Sage.If we go by the ancient texts in local language,analyzing amshas(within the frame of 12 Rashis(Rashige Swamshe) can be clearly understood. Karakamsha is always the navamsha occuppied by AkmaKaraka and there is no disagreement.After identification how we analyze is the key.Analysis is always done w.r to a skeleton of 12 Rashis.Eg:AK Mars in Mithuna Navamsha(no matter in which Rashi this Mars is placed) will then point back to one SINGLE Mithuna Rashi.This has to be understood as Mars having swamsha in Mithuna RASHI.It is different from PLACED in Mithuna Rashi.You are mixing the two. > > Chandrashekhar. > Respect Pradeep > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > Thanks a lot for your kind reply and trust. > > Yes i have learned this from your teachings -Grahas have to be > > strong to give karaka bhava nasha results.Hence once i had guessed > > Late Saddam husseins lagna as Simha ,with exalted Surya in the 9th. > > > > The whole point in bringing this up was to say that grahas in > > association with rashis bring in results.If you say Venus and Mars > > owning 2nd from karakamsha is the meaning- Then all those > > individuals having Karakamsha as > > 1)Aries > > 2)Virgo > > 3)Meena > > 4)Libra > > > > will behave in such a fashion as 2nd from these are owned by either > > Mars/Venus. > > > > Moreover,there are nine Aries navamshas,Nine Taurus etc repeating 12 > > times within a Rashi of 360 degrees.And any of these can qualify for > > meeting our condition.Do you think it is such a general reference. > > > > On the other hand in any chart,Venus and Mars will have only one and > > only one navamsha/trmishamsha etc. Thus sage is talking about mars > > and Venus having vargas in the 2nd from karakamsha/swamsha rashis > > for light results and their yuti/aspects resulting in stronger > > results. > > > > ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe -BPHS Karakamsha Phala adhyaya'' - is > > talking about Karaka graha having its amsha(swamsha) in rashis > > starting from mesha onwards.In other words plural is meant and > > meanings are contextual. > > > > Here sage is talking about graha having - swamshe where? - in > > meshadi rashige (rashis) > > > > Similarly -Tatra -(There) Bhrigwonkaraka Varge - Mars and Venus are > > having Vargas. > > > > Rashi is ofcourse the first Varga.When a graha is studied w.r to one > > full span of a Riksha/Kshethra/Bhava it is a study about the first > > varga.Within this Rashi if we are studying one half influences - it > > becomes Hora.One ninth it becomes navamsha. > > > > But no matter whether you get aries from aries rashi or taurus rashi > > we have only one Aries Rashi to tudy Rashi Tulya or Transit > > results.Why is it so.Because amshas relate to root Rashis.On the > > other hand you are assuming that the mapping back is pointing to > > placaments -which can happen only in case of Vragottama. > > > > Hope this is clear. > > > > I was able to read BPHS sanskrit shlokas and it is surprising to > > note why others have difference in opinion with Raoji. > > I will write it as another mail. > > > > Respect > > Pardeep > > > > -- In > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > I would not have replied to the query had it not been from you. I > > hope > > > my answer does not begin another round of uncouth comments. > > > > > > First, the karaka Bhava nasha does not occur when a rasi owned by > > a > > > karaka happens to be in the bhava. It is the karaka itself that > > has to > > > occupy the bhava for which it is karaka. My personal opinion is > > that > > > Karaka bhava nasha occurs only when the karaka so occupying the > > bhava is > > > strong and that it does not happen always. Perhaps the saying > > arose out > > > of the way Guru and Shukra behave when occupying their karaka > > sthanas. > > > > > > I would not go into what is the correct understanding of > > shadvargas at > > > this point of time, or shadabalas for that matter. But I would > > like to > > > point out that as far as my little knowledge of Sanskrit goes, > > Varge is > > > not plural of varga. It only means " in the Varga " . > > > > > > By the way, I have not understood what you mean by " Basic > > > understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna or > > other > > > Planets " . Rasi is also one of the Shadavarga according to whatever > > of > > > astrology that I have read. Has some less known text proposed > > otherwise? > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekharji > > > > > > > > My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava > > nasha.I > > > > feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa rashis > > > > bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring such > > > > results. > > > > > > > > If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of > > Shadvargas > > > > as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely > > result. > > > > > > > > Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal > > Lagna > > > > or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please > > > > demonstrate through an example -any chart. > > > > > > > > We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have Aries > > > > navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring > > any of > > > > these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) they > > are > > > > falling within Rashi chakra. > > > > > > > > Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can point to > > > > Venus and Mars having various amshas ie > > navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha > > > > etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have rightly > > > > identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter any > > varga > > > > within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a > > thought > > > > from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by Mars > > and > > > > Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional spans,no > > body > > > > is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath > > settles > > > > down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been > > > > mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not > > proper.At a > > > > time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and > > Shukra > > > > can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a > > time. > > > > w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this > > shloka ,it > > > > is a common problem. > > > > But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the result. > > > > '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not > > point to > > > > 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is > > having > > > > many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. > > > > > > > > Thus the translation itself is not proper. > > > > > > > > I will explaion it in another mail. > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > > > I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he > > did. I > > > > only > > > > > gave what he said. > > > > > > > > > > I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to > > nowhere. > > > > > > > > > > One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean > > > > Shadvarga as > > > > > is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha > > ruled by > > > > > Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by > > > > Atmakaraka, > > > > > how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a > > navamsha > > > > chakra > > > > > or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes and > > the > > > > other > > > > > over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. > > > > > > > > > > About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also reads > > what > > > > BPHS > > > > > says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad vyaye > > > > saure... " > > > > > is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is clearly > > > > brought > > > > > out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe and > > its > > > > > meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies a > > > > malefic > > > > > rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the word > > > > rashi > > > > > could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word Rasi > > means > > > > a > > > > > heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It need > > not > > > > every > > > > > time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. > > > > > > > > > > There are too many yogas where position of a graha in > > Karakamsha or > > > > > Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be > > taken > > > > back > > > > > to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove KNR's > > > > views at > > > > > all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide with > > > > KNR's views. > > > > > > > > > > Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a > > > > different view. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > > As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing the > > > > > > stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. > > > > > > > > > > > > In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it is > > > > > > understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the > > preceding > > > > > > shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. > > > > > > I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major > > concern. > > > > > > Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is > > mentioned.2) > > > > Varga > > > > > > owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a > > certain > > > > rashi > > > > > > results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as > > papa > > > > rashis > > > > > > should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some > > graha is > > > > > > placed or having amsha results can be predicted. > > > > > > Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri > > Raths > > > > > > translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos > > > > translation > > > > > > in this case. > > > > > > As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this Varga is > > > > > > navamsha. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why did > > sage > > > > give > > > > > > superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly > > known.It > > > > > > clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from > > > > karakamsha > > > > > > rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a > > rashi. > > > > > > > > > > > > If some one wants to say sage is talking about shadvargas - > > Then > > > > > > again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be > > seen only > > > > > > w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande > > > > shudradevatha. > > > > > > Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha > > (Rashi) > > > > and > > > > > > Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically > > will be > > > > the > > > > > > question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning > > placement > > > > of > > > > > > planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra Ravou etc > > > > without > > > > > > specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he has no > > other > > > > > > way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of > > word > > > > > > Riksha or Rashi. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. > > > > > > I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their > > > > position.Shri > > > > > > K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > > > > <%40> > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha > > produces > > > > > > passion > > > > > > > and illicit relationship " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have not > > seen > > > > that > > > > > > > interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini > > sutras, I > > > > > > also > > > > > > > possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some other > > > > > > commentators) > > > > > > > to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by either > > > > Venus > > > > > > or > > > > > > > Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators say > > that > > > > it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of the > > > > > > shadvargas. > > > > > > > To me that is strange translation as Swamsha necessarily > > occurs > > > > in > > > > > > > Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may be > > that > > > > > > amsha can > > > > > > > indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D > > charts. I > > > > would > > > > > > not > > > > > > > think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that could > > never > > > > > > occur. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has > > interpreted > > > > this > > > > > > > > shloka.Also i would like to see your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think technically this is possible if it is in > > navamsha > > > > > > (can all > > > > > > > > shadvargas fall there) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If the > > 9th > > > > from > > > > > > > > Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and > > Kuja, he > > > > > > will be > > > > > > > > fond of others' wives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------- ---- > > - > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - Release > > > > Date: > > > > > > 6/11/2007 5:10 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2007 Report Share Posted July 4, 2007 Dear Pradeep, " Pradeep: Hora is a universal problem and not specific to our example,while thinking of shadvarga and we may deal this separately as another thread. " Why keep hora for a separate dealing? Is it not a varga amongst the shadvargas? " Pradeep:In this example Venus in the 7th is pointing to two things (7th bhava and a Planet).But with ''in the varga of'' explanation there is no planet - Just Lordship.It is then like for eg saying if 7th house is Libra/Taurus/Aries or Scorpio some results will come. " So how does this differ from your contention that the Vargas of Venus or Mars mean rasis of Venus or Mars? Or does that mean only one rasi when 2nd for Karakamsha falling in Varga od Venus or Mars, that you interpret as rasi? " Pradeep:I have never said ''in the vargas of'' - I have always said ''Vargas of''.There is a big difference.I was talking about Venus or Mars having Varga there(Not the ones lorded by them).Varge(ending with ''ay'') can have different meanings(Not always in the Varga of).For example Labh''e'' is in the 11th while Labhesh''e'' is just pointing to 11th lord. Rashige is pointing to plural - In the Rashis.Thus i feel it is contextual. " Could you explain the difference between " in the Vargas of " and " Vargas of " ? If Varga of a planet does not refer to one being lorded by a planet, pray what does it refer to? The simile of Labha and Labhesha seems inappropriate. You are talking about Vargas in both the cases of Vargas and not about Varga and Vargesha. Your reference to Rashige in the thread is unclear. Anyway what is the word that says " in the rashi " in Sanskrit according to you., since you feel Rashige is pointing to plural? " Pradeep:Can you pls translate - Meshadi + Rashige + Swamshe (What do you think Rashige means) For me there are two possibilities for ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe'' - a)Swamsha(Karakamsh a) in the Rashis from Mesha onwards b)Swamsha is a full chart with all Navamshas(K.N.Raojis view - In meshadi rashis within Swamshe).This is literally correct,but will fail with succeeding shlokas.If Swamsha is a full chart -from where do we count 10th/4th etc from Swamsha references.Thus swamsha is Karaka Grahas amsha(Swa -His,Amsha). I assume Raoji had Navamsha as a full chart in mind.Similarly LateSanthanam could not interpret the Lagna Shadvargake Shloka as the scholar some how misunderstood Sage.If we go by the ancient texts in local language,analyzing amshas(within the frame of 12 Rashis(Rashige Swamshe) can be clearly understood. Karakamsha is always the navamsha occuppied by AkmaKaraka and there is no disagreement.After identification how we analyze is the key.Analysis is always done w.r to a skeleton of 12 Rashis.Eg:AK Mars in Mithuna Navamsha(no matter in which Rashi this Mars is placed) will then point back to one SINGLE Mithuna Rashi.This has to be understood as Mars having swamsha in Mithuna RASHI.It is different from PLACED in Mithuna Rashi.You are mixing the two. " I would expect you to explain what you understand by Meshadi+rashige+swamshe. For me it means Karakamsha in Mesha etc. Amshas. If we take your contention of Swamsha in Mesha etc. rasis, and not amshas as is being hinted at, then amshas can not be named after rasis and should have other nomenclature. If that be so how do you map it back to rasi chart as is being suggested? And how does then see debility or exaltation of a planet in navamsha chart as there are nothing that can be termed as rasis there as is being advocated? I also fail to understand why only the first shloka of Karakamshaphaladhyaaya is being quoted and not the 2nd and other shlokas which clearly talking about MeshaaMshe and Vrishabhaamshe, removing any ambiguity in any body's mind as to whether BPHS is referring to Rasi or amshas? This is not contextual interpretation as is being claimed at all, it seems to me. _Some comments for all those participating in the discussions: _ I also see some very low level remarks like " trying to fool others " and so on with regards to well respected and knowledgeable astrologers, in off shoots of this thread. Just because bad words are used does not mean a point is proved. One may hold a different opinion on some astrological point but that does not give anyone a license to bad mouth others, even in the heat of discussion on the divine science. I too do not think graha drishtis in navamsha or other D-charts to be right, but I never use such language (of course, I may not be the role model for modern day astrologers). There are umpteen number of astrological texts that talk of aspects on Dreshkana lagna, navamsha lagna and lagna, by the same graha, or any two of them etc.indicating that some authorities did consider drishtis in those charts as they could not refer to one rasi as had that been the case then Vargottam lagna could have been mentioned there. Take care, Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > Pls find my reply. > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > If we accept your argument for the sake of argument, how do you > look at > > Shukra or Mangal Varga in Hora chart? As to nine Aries navamsha > and so > > on, if trouble from rats etc is accepted in all 9 of them why only > in > > this particular case should there be an exception? > > Pradeep: Hora is a universal problem and not specific to our > example,while thinking of shadvarga and we may deal this sepeartely > as another thread. > > > > > If you remember, there is a dictum that Venus in the 7th makes a > person > libidinous. Now in that case this could happen with any > lagna in a rasi > chart. So does that mean the dictum itself is not > to be applied in the > rasi chart? > > Pradeep:In this example Venus in the 7th is pointing to two things > (7th bhava and a Planet).But with ''in the varga of'' explanation > there is no planet - Just Lordship.It is then like for eg saying if > 7th house is Libra/Taurus/Aries or Scorpio some results will come. > > > > > Personally speaking, I do not think any of the astrological > principle > given is to be treated as a standalone principle that > can be applied > without assessing the strength of a bhava. > > > > I think I have already explained that, as far as I think, " Varge " > means > " in the varga of " and not " in the vargas of " . I am sure some > one who is > a scholar of Sanskrit may know better, but " Varge " is > certainly not plural. > > Pradeep:I have never said ''in the vargas of'' - I have always > said ''Vargas of''.There is a big difference.I was talking about > Venus or Mars having Varga there(Not the ones lorded by them).Varge > (ending with ''ay'') can have different meanings(Not always in the > Varga of).For example Labh''e'' is in the 11th while Labhesh''e'' is > just pointing to 11th lord. > > Rashige is pointing to plural - In the Rashis.Thus i feel it is > contextual. > > > > > I seriously doubt that " Meshaadi rashige Swamshe " means what you > are > trying to translate it to mean neither does the respected R. > Santanam > who has translated it to mean as " Karakamsha identical > with Aries etc. " > He also goes on to say in the notes that > Karakamsha is the navamsha > occupied by the Atma karaka. And if you > care to read the next shloka it > talks about " grihe > Ushakamaarjaaraa meshaaMshe hyaatmakaarake " , leaving > > no scope for interpretation as to what Parashara meant by > Karakamsha. So > why you, or as you say MR. Rao, insist that > Karakamsha means the Rasi > occupied in rasi chart, identical to the > Navamsha occupied by the > Atmakaraka in navamsha, is not at all > very clear. > > Pradeep:Can you pls translate - Meshadi + Rashige + Swamshe (What do > you think Rashige means) > > For me there are two possibilities for ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe'' - > > a)Swamsha(Karakamsha) in the Rashis from Mesha onwards > > b)Swamsha is a full chart with all Navamshas(K.N.Raojis view - In > meshadi rashis within Swamshe).This is literally correct,but will > fail with succeeding shlokas.If Swamsha is a full chart -from where > do we count 10th/4th etc from Swamsha references.Thus swamsha is > Karaka Grahas amsha(Swa -His,Amsha). > > I assume Raoji had Navamsha as a full chart in mind.Similarly Late > Santhanam could not interpret the Lagna Shadvargake Shloka as the > scholar some how misunderstood Sage.If we go by the ancient texts in > local language,analyzing amshas(within the frame of 12 Rashis(Rashige > Swamshe) can be clearly understood. > > Karakamsha is always the navamsha occuppied by AkmaKaraka and there > is no disagreement.After identification how we analyze is the > key.Analysis is always done w.r to a skeleton of 12 Rashis.Eg:AK > Mars in Mithuna Navamsha(no matter in which Rashi this Mars is > placed) will then point back to one SINGLE Mithuna Rashi.This has to > be understood as Mars having swamsha in Mithuna RASHI.It is > different from PLACED in Mithuna Rashi.You are mixing the two. > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > Respect > Pradeep > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your kind reply and trust. > > > Yes i have learned this from your teachings -Grahas have to be > > > strong to give karaka bhava nasha results.Hence once i had > guessed > > > Late Saddam husseins lagna as Simha ,with exalted Surya in the > 9th. > > > > > > The whole point in bringing this up was to say that grahas in > > > association with rashis bring in results.If you say Venus and > Mars > > > owning 2nd from karakamsha is the meaning- Then all those > > > individuals having Karakamsha as > > > 1)Aries > > > 2)Virgo > > > 3)Meena > > > 4)Libra > > > > > > will behave in such a fashion as 2nd from these are owned by > either > > > Mars/Venus. > > > > > > Moreover,there are nine Aries navamshas,Nine Taurus etc > repeating 12 > > > times within a Rashi of 360 degrees.And any of these can qualify > for > > > meeting our condition.Do you think it is such a general > reference. > > > > > > On the other hand in any chart,Venus and Mars will have only one > and > > > only one navamsha/trmishamsha etc. Thus sage is talking about > mars > > > and Venus having vargas in the 2nd from karakamsha/swamsha rashis > > > for light results and their yuti/aspects resulting in stronger > > > results. > > > > > > ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe -BPHS Karakamsha Phala adhyaya'' - is > > > talking about Karaka graha having its amsha(swamsha) in rashis > > > starting from mesha onwards.In other words plural is meant and > > > meanings are contextual. > > > > > > Here sage is talking about graha having - swamshe where? - in > > > meshadi rashige (rashis) > > > > > > Similarly -Tatra -(There) Bhrigwonkaraka Varge - Mars and Venus > are > > > having Vargas. > > > > > > Rashi is ofcourse the first Varga.When a graha is studied w.r to > one > > > full span of a Riksha/Kshethra/Bhava it is a study about the > first > > > varga.Within this Rashi if we are studying one half influences - > it > > > becomes Hora.One ninth it becomes navamsha. > > > > > > But no matter whether you get aries from aries rashi or taurus > rashi > > > we have only one Aries Rashi to tudy Rashi Tulya or Transit > > > results.Why is it so.Because amshas relate to root Rashis.On the > > > other hand you are assuming that the mapping back is pointing to > > > placaments -which can happen only in case of Vragottama. > > > > > > Hope this is clear. > > > > > > I was able to read BPHS sanskrit shlokas and it is surprising to > > > note why others have difference in opinion with Raoji. > > > I will write it as another mail. > > > > > > Respect > > > Pardeep > > > > > > -- In > <%40> > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > I would not have replied to the query had it not been from > you. I > > > hope > > > > my answer does not begin another round of uncouth comments. > > > > > > > > First, the karaka Bhava nasha does not occur when a rasi owned > by > > > a > > > > karaka happens to be in the bhava. It is the karaka itself that > > > has to > > > > occupy the bhava for which it is karaka. My personal opinion is > > > that > > > > Karaka bhava nasha occurs only when the karaka so occupying the > > > bhava is > > > > strong and that it does not happen always. Perhaps the saying > > > arose out > > > > of the way Guru and Shukra behave when occupying their karaka > > > sthanas. > > > > > > > > I would not go into what is the correct understanding of > > > shadvargas at > > > > this point of time, or shadabalas for that matter. But I would > > > like to > > > > point out that as far as my little knowledge of Sanskrit goes, > > > Varge is > > > > not plural of varga. It only means " in the Varga " . > > > > > > > > By the way, I have not understood what you mean by " Basic > > > > understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna > or > > > other > > > > Planets " . Rasi is also one of the Shadavarga according to > whatever > > > of > > > > astrology that I have read. Has some less known text proposed > > > otherwise? > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekharji > > > > > > > > > > My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava > > > nasha.I > > > > > feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa > rashis > > > > > bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring > such > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of > > > Shadvargas > > > > > as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely > > > result. > > > > > > > > > > Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our > natal > > > Lagna > > > > > or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please > > > > > demonstrate through an example -any chart. > > > > > > > > > > We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have > Aries > > > > > navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring > > > any of > > > > > these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) > they > > > are > > > > > falling within Rashi chakra. > > > > > > > > > > Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can > point to > > > > > Venus and Mars having various amshas ie > > > navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha > > > > > etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have > rightly > > > > > identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter > any > > > varga > > > > > within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a > > > thought > > > > > from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by > Mars > > > and > > > > > Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional > spans,no > > > body > > > > > is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath > > > settles > > > > > down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been > > > > > mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not > > > proper.At a > > > > > time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and > > > Shukra > > > > > can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a > > > time. > > > > > w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this > > > shloka ,it > > > > > is a common problem. > > > > > But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the > result. > > > > > '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not > > > point to > > > > > 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is > > > having > > > > > many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. > > > > > > > > > > Thus the translation itself is not proper. > > > > > > > > > > I will explaion it in another mail. > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > > > <%40> > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > > > > > I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he > > > did. I > > > > > only > > > > > > gave what he said. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to > > > nowhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean > > > > > Shadvarga as > > > > > > is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha > > > ruled by > > > > > > Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by > > > > > Atmakaraka, > > > > > > how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a > > > navamsha > > > > > chakra > > > > > > or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes > and > > > the > > > > > other > > > > > > over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. > > > > > > > > > > > > About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also > reads > > > what > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad > vyaye > > > > > saure... " > > > > > > is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is > clearly > > > > > brought > > > > > > out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe > and > > > its > > > > > > meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies > a > > > > > malefic > > > > > > rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the > word > > > > > rashi > > > > > > could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word > Rasi > > > means > > > > > a > > > > > > heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It > need > > > not > > > > > every > > > > > > time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. > > > > > > > > > > > > There are too many yogas where position of a graha in > > > Karakamsha or > > > > > > Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be > > > taken > > > > > back > > > > > > to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove > KNR's > > > > > views at > > > > > > all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide > with > > > > > KNR's views. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a > > > > > different view. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > > > As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing > the > > > > > > > stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it > is > > > > > > > understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the > > > preceding > > > > > > > shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. > > > > > > > I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major > > > concern. > > > > > > > Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is > > > mentioned.2) > > > > > Varga > > > > > > > owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a > > > certain > > > > > rashi > > > > > > > results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as > > > papa > > > > > rashis > > > > > > > should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some > > > graha is > > > > > > > placed or having amsha results can be predicted. > > > > > > > Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri > > > Raths > > > > > > > translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos > > > > > translation > > > > > > > in this case. > > > > > > > As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this > Varga is > > > > > > > navamsha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why > did > > > sage > > > > > give > > > > > > > superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly > > > known.It > > > > > > > clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from > > > > > karakamsha > > > > > > > rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a > > > rashi. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If some one wants to say sage is talking about > shadvargas - > > > Then > > > > > > > again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be > > > seen only > > > > > > > w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande > > > > > shudradevatha. > > > > > > > Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha > > > (Rashi) > > > > > and > > > > > > > Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically > > > will be > > > > > the > > > > > > > question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning > > > placement > > > > > of > > > > > > > planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra > Ravou etc > > > > > without > > > > > > > specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he > has no > > > other > > > > > > > way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of > > > word > > > > > > > Riksha or Rashi. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. > > > > > > > I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their > > > > > position.Shri > > > > > > > K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <%40> > > > <%40> > > > > > <%40> > > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha > > > produces > > > > > > > passion > > > > > > > > and illicit relationship " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have > not > > > seen > > > > > that > > > > > > > > interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini > > > sutras, I > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some > other > > > > > > > commentators) > > > > > > > > to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by > either > > > > > Venus > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators > say > > > that > > > > > it > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of > the > > > > > > > shadvargas. > > > > > > > > To me that is strange translation as Swamsha > necessarily > > > occurs > > > > > in > > > > > > > > Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may > be > > > that > > > > > > > amsha can > > > > > > > > indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D > > > charts. I > > > > > would > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that > could > > > never > > > > > > > occur. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has > > > interpreted > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > shloka.Also i would like to see your view. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think technically this is possible if it is in > > > navamsha > > > > > > > (can all > > > > > > > > > shadvargas fall there) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If > the > > > 9th > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and > > > Kuja, he > > > > > > > will be > > > > > > > > > fond of others' wives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Respect > > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------- > ---- > > > - > > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - > Release > > > > > Date: > > > > > > > 6/11/2007 5:10 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2007 Report Share Posted July 6, 2007 Dear Prafulla, That is not a bad idea. However, as you must know that most of the time when one is trying to promote something as the only interpretation of any science, there is a tendency to use very tenuous logic to prove a point. Neither can the effects stated in the shlokas be taken literally as they are trying to tell us some principle. So literal application of the effects of position of planets in certain places from karakamsha whether in navamsha or rasi charts may not give the black and white that appears to be sought. That does not serve any purpose in advancing the cause of correct prediction. I will give you an example for this. It is said that if the 4th from Karakamsha is occupied by Saturn and Rahu, the jataka has a house made of stone and if Sun occupies the 4th one gets the house made of straw. Now whether you look at 4th from karakamsha in Navamsha chakra or you go to the rasi identical to the navamsha occupied by the AK in rasi chakra, you would not find many living in houses made out of stone or straws in the modern world. I think it would be better if the participants of the list go through the entire discussion and find out for themselves what they find applicable according to their own experience. Chandrashekhar. Prafulla Gang wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji and Pradeep ji, > > So there are two likely interpretation. Would not it be better, if you > both take any number of specimen charts and interpret from both the > perspectives - we will know which works better and consistently; and > then we may pick that one for reading the charts. > > regards / Prafulla Gang > http://www.prafulla.net <http://www.prafulla.net> > > " The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be > taken seriously. " > ************************************************ > > > > > chandrashekhar46 > <chandrashekhar46%40.co.uk> > > Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:10:30 +0530 > > <%40> > > Re: Re: Karakamsha -Chandrashekhar ji -1 > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > If we accept your argument for the sake of argument, how do you look at > > Shukra or Mangal Varga in Hora chart? As to nine Aries navamsha and so > > on, if trouble from rats etc is accepted in all 9 of them why only in > > this particular case should there be an exception? > > > > If you remember, there is a dictum that Venus in the 7th makes a person > > libidinous. Now in that case this could happen with any lagna in a rasi > > chart. So does that mean the dictum itself is not to be applied in the > > rasi chart? > > > > Personally speaking, I do not think any of the astrological principle > > given is to be treated as a standalone principle that can be applied > > without assessing the strength of a bhava. > > > > I think I have already explained that, as far as I think, " Varge " means > > " in the varga of " and not " in the vargas of " . I am sure some one who is > > a scholar of Sanskrit may know better, but " Varge " is certainly not > > plural. > > > > I seriously doubt that " Meshaadi rashige Swamshe " means what you are > > trying to translate it to mean neither does the respected R. Santanam > > who has translated it to mean as " Karakamsha identical with Aries etc. " > > He also goes on to say in the notes that Karakamsha is the navamsha > > occupied by the Atma karaka. And if you care to read the next shloka it > > talks about " grihe mUshakamaarjaaraa meshaaMshe hyaatmakaarake " , leaving > > no scope for interpretation as to what Parashara meant by Karakamsha. So > > why you, or as you say MR. Rao, insist that Karakamsha means the Rasi > > occupied in rasi chart, identical to the Navamsha occupied by the > > Atmakaraka in navamsha, is not at all very clear. > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > >> > >> Dear Chandrashekhar ji > >> > >> Thanks a lot for your kind reply and trust. > >> Yes i have learned this from your teachings -Grahas have to be > >> strong to give karaka bhava nasha results.Hence once i had guessed > >> Late Saddam husseins lagna as Simha ,with exalted Surya in the 9th. > >> > >> The whole point in bringing this up was to say that grahas in > >> association with rashis bring in results.If you say Venus and Mars > >> owning 2nd from karakamsha is the meaning- Then all those > >> individuals having Karakamsha as > >> 1)Aries > >> 2)Virgo > >> 3)Meena > >> 4)Libra > >> > >> will behave in such a fashion as 2nd from these are owned by either > >> Mars/Venus. > >> > >> Moreover,there are nine Aries navamshas,Nine Taurus etc repeating 12 > >> times within a Rashi of 360 degrees.And any of these can qualify for > >> meeting our condition.Do you think it is such a general reference. > >> > >> On the other hand in any chart,Venus and Mars will have only one and > >> only one navamsha/trmishamsha etc. Thus sage is talking about mars > >> and Venus having vargas in the 2nd from karakamsha/swamsha rashis > >> for light results and their yuti/aspects resulting in stronger > >> results. > >> > >> ''Meshadi Rashige Swamshe -BPHS Karakamsha Phala adhyaya'' - is > >> talking about Karaka graha having its amsha(swamsha) in rashis > >> starting from mesha onwards.In other words plural is meant and > >> meanings are contextual. > >> > >> Here sage is talking about graha having - swamshe where? - in > >> meshadi rashige (rashis) > >> > >> Similarly -Tatra -(There) Bhrigwonkaraka Varge - Mars and Venus are > >> having Vargas. > >> > >> Rashi is ofcourse the first Varga.When a graha is studied w.r to one > >> full span of a Riksha/Kshethra/Bhava it is a study about the first > >> varga.Within this Rashi if we are studying one half influences -it > >> becomes Hora.One ninth it becomes navamsha. > >> > >> But no matter whether you get aries from aries rashi or taurus rashi > >> we have only one Aries Rashi to tudy Rashi Tulya or Transit > >> results.Why is it so.Because amshas relate to root Rashis.On the > >> other hand you are assuming that the mapping back is pointing to > >> placaments -which can happen only in case of Vragottama. > >> > >> Hope this is clear. > >> > >> I was able to read BPHS sanskrit shlokas and it is surprising to > >> note why others have difference in opinion with Raoji. > >> I will write it as another mail. > >> > >> Respect > >> Pardeep > >> > >> -- In > <%40> > >> <%40>, Chandrashekhar > >> <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > >>> > >>> Dear Pradeep, > >>> > >>> I would not have replied to the query had it not been from you. I > >> hope > >>> my answer does not begin another round of uncouth comments. > >>> > >>> First, the karaka Bhava nasha does not occur when a rasi owned by > >> a > >>> karaka happens to be in the bhava. It is the karaka itself that > >> has to > >>> occupy the bhava for which it is karaka. My personal opinion is > >> that > >>> Karaka bhava nasha occurs only when the karaka so occupying the > >> bhava is > >>> strong and that it does not happen always. Perhaps the saying > >> arose out > >>> of the way Guru and Shukra behave when occupying their karaka > >> sthanas. > >>> > >>> I would not go into what is the correct understanding of > >> shadvargas at > >>> this point of time, or shadabalas for that matter. But I would > >> like to > >>> point out that as far as my little knowledge of Sanskrit goes, > >> Varge is > >>> not plural of varga. It only means " in the Varga " . > >>> > >>> By the way, I have not understood what you mean by " Basic > >>> understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal Lagna or > >> other > >>> Planets " . Rasi is also one of the Shadavarga according to whatever > >> of > >>> astrology that I have read. Has some less known text proposed > >> otherwise? > >>> > >>> Chandrashekhar. > >>> > >>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Dear Chandrashekharji > >>>> > >>>> My doubt is if 9th bhava is Simha will we have Karaka Bhava > >> nasha.I > >>>> feel Surya has to be placed in the 9th.Similarly two papa rashis > >>>> bordering Lagna do not result in Papakartari.Grahas bring such > >>>> results. > >>>> > >>>> If we are not prepared to understand the baisc meaning of > >> Shadvargas > >>>> as advised by sages,erroneous translations will definitely > >> result. > >>>> > >>>> Basic understanding- Shadvargas are found either for our natal > >> Lagna > >>>> or other Planets.If anyone can find/derive otherwise please > >>>> demonstrate through an example -any chart. > >>>> > >>>> We have 108 navamsha sectors and a single planet can have Aries > >>>> navamsha in 9 possible ways.But then how are we able to bring > >> any of > >>>> these navamshas to a single Aries no matter,where(Rashis) they > >> are > >>>> falling within Rashi chakra. > >>>> > >>>> Sage can very well mean shadvargas of Venus/Mars.He can point to > >>>> Venus and Mars having various amshas ie > >> navamsha/drekkana/trimshamsha > >>>> etc in the rashi which is 2nd to Karakamsha.As you have rightly > >>>> identified - Nobody can find dwadshamsha or for that matter any > >> varga > >>>> within ''divisional spans'' and sage will never expect such a > >> thought > >>>> from students.But everyone is thinking of ''Vargas owned by Mars > >> and > >>>> Kuja''.As shadvargas are not possible within divisional spans,no > >> body > >>>> is sure on what to do and some smart jyotishis like shri Rath > >> settles > >>>> down with navamsha even when ''Varge'' plural has been > >>>> mentioned.''There are four such navamshas'' is also not > >> proper.At a > >>>> time only one varga is possible. On the other hand Venus and > >> Shukra > >>>> can have ''Varge''(multiple vargas) - in the same rashi at a > >> time. > >>>> w.r to doubt regarding Hora-This is not specific to this > >> shloka ,it > >>>> is a common problem. > >>>> But the basic thing is more number of vargas stronger the result. > >>>> '' If the 10th house has more Saturnian Vargas'' - does not > >> point to > >>>> 10th house having capricorn or aquarius.But whether Saturn is > >> having > >>>> many amshas/vargas in the Rashi acting as 10th House. > >>>> > >>>> Thus the translation itself is not proper. > >>>> > >>>> I will explaion it in another mail. > >>>> > >>>> Respect > >>>> Pradeep > >>>> > >>>> > <%40> > >> <%40> > >>>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar > >>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Dear Pradeep, > >>>>> > >>>>> I can not comment on why Sanjay Rath interpreted the way he > >> did. I > >>>> only > >>>>> gave what he said. > >>>>> > >>>>> I have already indicated that this discussion is leading to > >> nowhere. > >>>>> > >>>>> One thing I would like to understand is why must Varge mean > >>>> Shadvarga as > >>>>> is being insisted, if we think that it can not be navamsha > >> ruled by > >>>>> Shukra or Kuja? When karakamsha means navamsha occupied by > >>>> Atmakaraka, > >>>>> how do you find a Dwadashaamsha next to Karakamsha in a > >> navamsha > >>>> chakra > >>>>> or vise a versa as one s spread over 3 degree 20 minutes and > >> the > >>>> other > >>>>> over 1 degree of the zodiacal arc. > >>>>> > >>>>> About the 12th from Shani it would be better if one also reads > >> what > >>>> BPHS > >>>>> says about 12th from Karakamsha wherein " Kaarakaamshaad vyaye > >>>> saure... " > >>>>> is clearly mentioned. So the 12th from Karakamsha is clearly > >>>> brought > >>>>> out. There in you will find why the reference to paparxe and > >> its > >>>>> meaning. Parashara says that if such a Shani also occupies a > >>>> malefic > >>>>> rasi then the person worships kshudra devata. But then the word > >>>> rashi > >>>>> could also be used to indicate the navamsha, as the word Rasi > >> means > >>>> a > >>>>> heap and could be used to indicate the navamsha rasi. It need > >> not > >>>> every > >>>>> time mean rasi as in rasi chakra. > >>>>> > >>>>> There are too many yogas where position of a graha in > >> Karakamsha or > >>>>> Swaamsha, alone, is given to think that Karakamsha is to be > >> taken > >>>> back > >>>>> to rasi chakra and read there. Those shlokas do not prove KNR's > >>>> views at > >>>>> all. Some shlokas could however be interpreted to coincide with > >>>> KNR's views. > >>>>> > >>>>> Of course this is my personal view and others could hold a > >>>> different view. > >>>>> > >>>>> Chandrashekhar. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks for the explanation. > >>>>>> As you say,we should not see shlokas in isolation.Seeing the > >>>>>> stream,preceding,succeeding is necessary. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In the given case why is sage mentioning ''Varge'' if it is > >>>>>> understood as an amsha arrangement.For eg in none of the > >> preceding > >>>>>> shlokas we have that usage.Tatra Ravou etc. > >>>>>> I dont know about 2 or 9th -anyways it is not our major > >> concern. > >>>>>> Two possibilities.1)Mars and Kuja having Varga is > >> mentioned.2) > >>>> Varga > >>>>>> owned by Kuja is mentioned.I will go for 1.By having a > >> certain > >>>> rashi > >>>>>> results cnnot be predicted.Then individuals with lagna as > >> papa > >>>> rashis > >>>>>> should all be treated as bad.In a papa rashi ifsome some > >> graha is > >>>>>> placed or having amsha results can be predicted. > >>>>>> Venus and Mars having amsha there is being mentioned.Shri > >> Raths > >>>>>> translation is very strange.Pls see shri Suryanaain raos > >>>> translation > >>>>>> in this case. > >>>>>> As karakamsha is found from navamsha,we may say this Varga is > >>>>>> navamsha. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Now there is an inconsistency.Sutras will be short.Why did > >> sage > >>>> give > >>>>>> superflous info.Why did Sage say Varga,if it is clearly > >> known.It > >>>>>> clearly means the previous ones are graha placements from > >>>> karakamsha > >>>>>> rashi.And this one points to amsha in the 2nd from such a > >> rashi. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If some one wants to say sage is talking about shadvargas - > >> Then > >>>>>> again reference is karakamsha rashi as shadvargas can be > >> seen only > >>>>>> w.r to rashi.I prefer with first translation. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Now the most important shloka -Su-80-Paparkshe mande > >>>> shudradevatha. > >>>>>> Sage is talking about Karakamasha falling in papa Riksha > >> (Rashi) > >>>> and > >>>>>> Saturns placement there.Rashi isclearly mentioned. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Now why is Sage mentioning Paprkshe or Rashi specifically > >> will be > >>>> the > >>>>>> question in mind.For all other cases he was mentioning > >> placement > >>>> of > >>>>>> planets in karakamsha Rashi.Thus he could say Tatra Ravou etc > >>>> without > >>>>>> specyfying Rashi, as it is understood.In this case he has no > >> other > >>>>>> way as a malefic Rashi can only be expressed with help of > >> word > >>>>>> Riksha or Rashi. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Chandrashekhar ji kindly give your views. > >>>>>> I would request shri Narasimha Rao etc to clarify their > >>>> position.Shri > >>>>>> K.N.Raojis views are being proved true through these shlokas. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Respect > >>>>>> Pradeep > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > <%40> > >> <%40> > >>>> <%40> > >>>>>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar > >>>>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Dear Pradeep, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> He says " Venus or Mars owning the second from swamsha > >> produces > >>>>>> passion > >>>>>>> and illicit relationship " > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Where is the question of all shadvargas here? I have not > >> seen > >>>> that > >>>>>>> interpretation by others whose commentaries on Jaimini > >> sutras, I > >>>>>> also > >>>>>>> possess. It is the 2nd house (Sanjay) or 9th (Some other > >>>>>> commentators) > >>>>>>> to the Swamsha. The next navamsha has to be ruled by either > >>>> Venus > >>>>>> or > >>>>>>> Mars and there are 4 such navamshas. Some commentators say > >> that > >>>> it > >>>>>> is > >>>>>>> enough if the second from swamsha happens to be any of the > >>>>>> shadvargas. > >>>>>>> To me that is strange translation as Swamsha necessarily > >> occurs > >>>> in > >>>>>>> Navamsha. But then the logic of those commentators may be > >> that > >>>>>> amsha can > >>>>>>> indicate any one of the divisions of any of the 6 D > >> charts. I > >>>> would > >>>>>> not > >>>>>>> think that is right, specially as in Hora chart that could > >> never > >>>>>> occur. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Chandrashekhar. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I will be interested to know how Shri Rath has > >> interpreted > >>>> this > >>>>>>>> shloka.Also i would like to see your view. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Do you think technically this is possible if it is in > >> navamsha > >>>>>> (can all > >>>>>>>> shadvargas fall there) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> SU. 52.-Tatra bhrigwongaraka varge paradarikaha. If the > >> 9th > >>>> from > >>>>>>>> Karakamsa falls in one of the shadvargas of Sukra and > >> Kuja, he > >>>>>> will be > >>>>>>>> fond of others' wives. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Respect > >>>>>>>> Pradeep > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ------------------------ > >> - > >>>>>> ------ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/844 - Release > >>>> Date: > >>>>>> 6/11/2007 5:10 PM > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 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.