Karakamsha''KA'' Chandrashekhar ji Vs shri Sanjay Rath

June 26, 2007

Dear Chandrashekhar ji and Respected members

Shri Sanjay Rath clearly says ,Amshaka is pointing to the Rashi in

which a graha is having amsha.He also says,Karakamsha has one

meaning ,while Karakamsha KA has another meaning.

Chandrashekhar jis view is Amshaka is not pointing to the Rashi in

which a graha is having amsha.

Now Chandraekhar jis view is prudent as there are some shlokas which

shri Rath somehow has overlooked,contradicting his view point.

I respect shri Rath ,but i have to tell this.Sometimes the answer and

explanations given by shri Rath are not preceded by proper study.They

are just local(not global) answers and deals the question in a

temporal way.

Now if Shri Rath is not changing his opinion about amshaka,then all

the students who want to trust him blinldy will be in trouble.why?

In BPHS amsha and amshaka are used in a similar context in adjacent

shlokas.If shri Rath sticks to his opinion it is approval for

K.N.Raojis views.

I will quote Pramana now.

Karakamsha Phaladhyaya -

''Vrishamsha KA gathe'' Mithunamsha Gathe, Karkamshe ,Tulamshe etc

are used in the same context.Now as per shri Rath Taurus Amshas have

to be read from Rashi while the rest in navamsha arrangement.!!!

Definitely overlooked.

My view is they all refer to the Rashis on to which, karaka Graha is

having amsha.Reason - At the very beginning sage says ''Meshadi

RashiGE Swamshe''.Moreover they are used in exchange.

The texts that i have quoted from,in local language,clearly explains

how amshas are to be read.The whole arrangement is termed as amshakam

and sometimes drawn outside the rashi chakra itself.

Now Chandrashekhar ji

In your chart,Shani is AK and is Vargottama ,thus shani is placed in

your Karakamsha Rashi.

Now you have Guru and Chandra in the 5th from Karakamsha Rashi -

Veda/Vedanta Philosophy and authorship are mentioned in classics.

Guru will give you traditional paramparic knowledge - You got it

from your father.

Now there are many shlokas talking about yuti of planets in the 12th

from karakamsha.When planets placed in different rashis unite in a

single navamsha -do you think it is Yuthi.It is certainly not.They

are having amshaka in the same Rashi.

I feel there is no reason at all for ambiguity.

I would love if some one can check the latest views from shri Rath.He

is in agreement with Raoji ,unless wants to changes views on amshaka.

Respect

Pradeep

June 27, 2007

Dear Pradeep,

I can not comment on views of either Sanjay or K. N. Rao. First there is

no difference in the meaning of Amsha and Amshaka though it is perhaps

being confused. It also needs to be remembered that in astrological

translations many a times words are to be understood in the context that

they used. So we find Parashara mentioning karakamsha and Swamsha in

alternate lines (almost) while indicating the results of occupation of

Karakamsha by Sun etc. and many other places in karakamsha adhyaaya.

This does not mean he is speaking about two different parameters. I

think if any Sanskrit scholar who is also well versed in interpretation

of astrological texts will confirm this contention of mine if he is

watching this discussion.

If you want my personal opinion, I think that the results indicated on

the basis of Karakamsha without reference to the potential promised by

the rasi chart and the strength derived by the grahas in rasi chart,

through the Navamsha chart, are not likely to materialize. I hope this

opinion of mine does not create a big storm in the discussion on the

list. But this is my personal opinion, for whatever it is worth.

Take care,

Chandrashekhar.

vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Chandrashekhar ji and Respected members

>

> Shri Sanjay Rath clearly says ,Amshaka is pointing to the Rashi in

> which a graha is having amsha.He also says,Karakamsha has one

> meaning ,while Karakamsha KA has another meaning.

> Chandrashekhar jis view is Amshaka is not pointing to the Rashi in

> which a graha is having amsha.

>

> Now Chandraekhar jis view is prudent as there are some shlokas which

> shri Rath somehow has overlooked,contradicting his view point.

>

> I respect shri Rath ,but i have to tell this.Sometimes the answer and

> explanations given by shri Rath are not preceded by proper study.They

> are just local(not global) answers and deals the question in a

> temporal way.

>

> Now if Shri Rath is not changing his opinion about amshaka,then all

> the students who want to trust him blinldy will be in trouble.why?

> In BPHS amsha and amshaka are used in a similar context in adjacent

> shlokas.If shri Rath sticks to his opinion it is approval for

> K.N.Raojis views.

>

> I will quote Pramana now.

>

> Karakamsha Phaladhyaya -

>

> ''Vrishamsha KA gathe'' Mithunamsha Gathe, Karkamshe ,Tulamshe etc

> are used in the same context.Now as per shri Rath Taurus Amshas have

> to be read from Rashi while the rest in navamsha arrangement.!!!

> Definitely overlooked.

>

> My view is they all refer to the Rashis on to which, karaka Graha is

> having amsha.Reason - At the very beginning sage says ''Meshadi

> RashiGE Swamshe''.Moreover they are used in exchange.

>

> The texts that i have quoted from,in local language,clearly explains

> how amshas are to be read.The whole arrangement is termed as amshakam

> and sometimes drawn outside the rashi chakra itself.

>

> Now Chandrashekhar ji

>

> In your chart,Shani is AK and is Vargottama ,thus shani is placed in

> your Karakamsha Rashi.

>

> Now you have Guru and Chandra in the 5th from Karakamsha Rashi -

> Veda/Vedanta Philosophy and authorship are mentioned in classics.

> Guru will give you traditional paramparic knowledge - You got it

> from your father.

>

> Now there are many shlokas talking about yuti of planets in the 12th

> from karakamsha.When planets placed in different rashis unite in a

> single navamsha -do you think it is Yuthi.It is certainly not.They

> are having amshaka in the same Rashi.

>

> I feel there is no reason at all for ambiguity.

>

> I would love if some one can check the latest views from shri Rath.He

> is in agreement with Raoji ,unless wants to changes views on amshaka.

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

> ------

>

> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/865 - Release 6/24/2007 8:33

AM

>

June 27, 2007

Dear Sri Pradeep and Sri Chandrasekhar,

I have been following this thread on karakamsa and both of your

contributions.

I whole-heartedly appreciate both of you for your valuable inputs

you are providing to the astrological community. I would like to

share my opinion (through my own experience).

Considering Karakamsa from either Rasi or Navamsa chart alone most

probably leads to erroneous results, as I found both the approaches

working. I see the point Pradeep is making as very valuable; at the

same time I am not against using Navamsa chart as separate chart (of

course without losing the context of the Rasi chart), since any of

the varga charts will not give independent results if the Rasi chart

is ignored, as they themselves do not exist if the Rasi chart

doesn't exist. In fact Sri KN Rao also mentioned in several

occassions in many of his articles and books that yogas viewed in

the Rasi chart should also exist in the Navamsa chart for confirming

the results. If we do not see the Navamsa chart as a separate chart,

how can we see the yogas therein? For the purpose of checking some

yogas, Yuti and Veekshana (conjunction and aspects) in the navamsa

chart make sense. This kind of yuti or veekshana should be

considered on a hypothetical level (as mutual influence at the

amsha level) rather than being within a 30 deg. span. of Rasi.

Take an example. If a planet is exlated or in own house in the rasi

chart and attains debilitation in the Navamsa chart, it is condiered

as weakening of the actual strength shown in the Rasi. Why is this

considered so? It is considered like that because, even though the

planet is within its own or exlated rasi, still its positioning

within that particular sector (here navamsa) has weakened it; means,

within its own rasi, this particular sector is the weakest point for

the planet within the strongest rasi; hence it loses its strength

considerably. This means there is a gradation of strengths for the

planet from first navamsa to the last navamsa. The navamsa position

of a planet, thus indicates its refined placement within the rasi.

In fact, Sri KN Rao also gives equal weightage to both the Rasi and

Navamsa placement of a planet. If a planet is weak in one of them

that means half the weightage is lost. We may not give the same

level of treatment to other vargas as we give to Navamsa; but

Navamsa is as important as the Rasi; to the extent that it can be

viewed as an independent chart (to confirm the promise given by the

rasi chart).

Without a confirmation of Navamsa chart, yogas in the rasi chart

alone cannot and will not give expected results; I have observed

this phenomenon in several charts.

My own experience is; I have Chandra and Sukra both in the 12th

house from Karakamsa in the Navamsa chart (not in the rasi chart

with the rasi of karakamsa considering as the karakamsa lagna). I am

a deep devotee of Goddess Parvathi (represented by Chandra) and

Goddess Lakshmi (represented by Sukra). If the karakamsa is brought

to the Rasi chart, this cannot be explained. The sequence of my life

events are better explained only if I consider karakamsa lagna in

the navamsa chart; I am not discounting Pradeep's opinion here; I am

just saying that both approaches need to be considered on the chart,

and a composite opinion be formed, as Sri KN Rao always says.

On the other hand, considering the specific rasi in the Rasi chart

that holds karakamsa as the karakamsa lagna, my Sukra is in the 4th

house indicating my possession of a nice beautiful house, and

education/skills in arts (in addition to other traditional

education).

I am bringing this to both your knowledge only to summarize that

both your theories give results; but not necessarily in isolation of

the other.

Thanks for all your contribution.

Best regards,

Satya S Kolachina

, Chandrashekhar

<chandrashekhar46 wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> I can not comment on views of either Sanjay or K. N. Rao. First

there is

> no difference in the meaning of Amsha and Amshaka though it is

perhaps

> being confused. It also needs to be remembered that in

astrological

> translations many a times words are to be understood in the

context that

> they used. So we find Parashara mentioning karakamsha and Swamsha

in

> alternate lines (almost) while indicating the results of

occupation of

> Karakamsha by Sun etc. and many other places in karakamsha

adhyaaya.

> This does not mean he is speaking about two different parameters.

I

> think if any Sanskrit scholar who is also well versed in

interpretation

> of astrological texts will confirm this contention of mine if he

is

> watching this discussion.

>

> If you want my personal opinion, I think that the results

indicated on

> the basis of Karakamsha without reference to the potential

promised by

> the rasi chart and the strength derived by the grahas in rasi

chart,

> through the Navamsha chart, are not likely to materialize. I hope

this

> opinion of mine does not create a big storm in the discussion on

the

> list. But this is my personal opinion, for whatever it is worth.

>

> Take care,

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chandrashekhar ji and Respected members

> >

> > Shri Sanjay Rath clearly says ,Amshaka is pointing to the Rashi

in

> > which a graha is having amsha.He also says,Karakamsha has one

> > meaning ,while Karakamsha KA has another meaning.

> > Chandrashekhar jis view is Amshaka is not pointing to the Rashi

in

> > which a graha is having amsha.

> >

> > Now Chandraekhar jis view is prudent as there are some shlokas

which

> > shri Rath somehow has overlooked,contradicting his view point.

> >

> > I respect shri Rath ,but i have to tell this.Sometimes the

answer and

> > explanations given by shri Rath are not preceded by proper

study.They

> > are just local(not global) answers and deals the question in a

> > temporal way.

> >

> > Now if Shri Rath is not changing his opinion about amshaka,then

all

> > the students who want to trust him blinldy will be in

trouble.why?

> > In BPHS amsha and amshaka are used in a similar context in

adjacent

> > shlokas.If shri Rath sticks to his opinion it is approval for

> > K.N.Raojis views.

> >

> > I will quote Pramana now.

> >

> > Karakamsha Phaladhyaya -

> >

> > ''Vrishamsha KA gathe'' Mithunamsha Gathe, Karkamshe ,Tulamshe

etc

> > are used in the same context.Now as per shri Rath Taurus Amshas

have

> > to be read from Rashi while the rest in navamsha arrangement.!!!

> > Definitely overlooked.

> >

> > My view is they all refer to the Rashis on to which, karaka

Graha is

> > having amsha.Reason - At the very beginning sage says ''Meshadi

> > RashiGE Swamshe''.Moreover they are used in exchange.

> >

> > The texts that i have quoted from,in local language,clearly

explains

> > how amshas are to be read.The whole arrangement is termed as

amshakam

> > and sometimes drawn outside the rashi chakra itself.

> >

> > Now Chandrashekhar ji

> >

> > In your chart,Shani is AK and is Vargottama ,thus shani is

placed in

> > your Karakamsha Rashi.

> >

> > Now you have Guru and Chandra in the 5th from Karakamsha Rashi -

> > Veda/Vedanta Philosophy and authorship are mentioned in classics.

> > Guru will give you traditional paramparic knowledge - You got it

> > from your father.

> >

> > Now there are many shlokas talking about yuti of planets in the

12th

> > from karakamsha.When planets placed in different rashis unite in

a

> > single navamsha -do you think it is Yuthi.It is certainly

not.They

> > are having amshaka in the same Rashi.

> >

> > I feel there is no reason at all for ambiguity.

> >

> > I would love if some one can check the latest views from shri

Rath.He

> > is in agreement with Raoji ,unless wants to changes views on

amshaka.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> > --------------------------------

-------

> >

> > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/865 - Release Date:

6/24/2007 8:33 AM

> >

>

June 27, 2007

Dear Chandrashekhar ji

Thanks a lot for the reply.There are some important points in your

mail.

Totally agree with the strength related points.Karakamsha/Swamsha is

very true..

As mentioned,i am flying tommorrow morning to Lords for attending the

annual cricket meetings and will reply after my return on sunday.It

is already midnight.

Respect

Pradeep

, Chandrashekhar

<chandrashekhar46 wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> I can not comment on views of either Sanjay or K. N. Rao. First

there is

> no difference in the meaning of Amsha and Amshaka though it is

perhaps

> being confused. It also needs to be remembered that in astrological

> translations many a times words are to be understood in the context

that

> they used. So we find Parashara mentioning karakamsha and Swamsha

in

> alternate lines (almost) while indicating the results of occupation

of

> Karakamsha by Sun etc. and many other places in karakamsha

adhyaaya.

> This does not mean he is speaking about two different parameters. I

> think if any Sanskrit scholar who is also well versed in

interpretation

> of astrological texts will confirm this contention of mine if he is

> watching this discussion.

>

> If you want my personal opinion, I think that the results indicated

on

> the basis of Karakamsha without reference to the potential promised

by

> the rasi chart and the strength derived by the grahas in rasi

chart,

> through the Navamsha chart, are not likely to materialize. I hope

this

> opinion of mine does not create a big storm in the discussion on

the

> list. But this is my personal opinion, for whatever it is worth.

>

> Take care,

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chandrashekhar ji and Respected members

> >

> > Shri Sanjay Rath clearly says ,Amshaka is pointing to the Rashi in

> > which a graha is having amsha.He also says,Karakamsha has one

> > meaning ,while Karakamsha KA has another meaning.

> > Chandrashekhar jis view is Amshaka is not pointing to the Rashi in

> > which a graha is having amsha.

> >

> > Now Chandraekhar jis view is prudent as there are some shlokas

which

> > shri Rath somehow has overlooked,contradicting his view point.

> >

> > I respect shri Rath ,but i have to tell this.Sometimes the answer

and

> > explanations given by shri Rath are not preceded by proper

study.They

> > are just local(not global) answers and deals the question in a

> > temporal way.

> >

> > Now if Shri Rath is not changing his opinion about amshaka,then

all

> > the students who want to trust him blinldy will be in trouble.why?

> > In BPHS amsha and amshaka are used in a similar context in

adjacent

> > shlokas.If shri Rath sticks to his opinion it is approval for

> > K.N.Raojis views.

> >

> > I will quote Pramana now.

> >

> > Karakamsha Phaladhyaya -

> >

> > ''Vrishamsha KA gathe'' Mithunamsha Gathe, Karkamshe ,Tulamshe etc

> > are used in the same context.Now as per shri Rath Taurus Amshas

have

> > to be read from Rashi while the rest in navamsha arrangement.!!!

> > Definitely overlooked.

> >

> > My view is they all refer to the Rashis on to which, karaka Graha

is

> > having amsha.Reason - At the very beginning sage says ''Meshadi

> > RashiGE Swamshe''.Moreover they are used in exchange.

> >

> > The texts that i have quoted from,in local language,clearly

explains

> > how amshas are to be read.The whole arrangement is termed as

amshakam

> > and sometimes drawn outside the rashi chakra itself.

> >

> > Now Chandrashekhar ji

> >

> > In your chart,Shani is AK and is Vargottama ,thus shani is placed

in

> > your Karakamsha Rashi.

> >

> > Now you have Guru and Chandra in the 5th from Karakamsha Rashi -

> > Veda/Vedanta Philosophy and authorship are mentioned in classics.

> > Guru will give you traditional paramparic knowledge - You got it

> > from your father.

> >

> > Now there are many shlokas talking about yuti of planets in the

12th

> > from karakamsha.When planets placed in different rashis unite in a

> > single navamsha -do you think it is Yuthi.It is certainly not.They

> > are having amshaka in the same Rashi.

> >

> > I feel there is no reason at all for ambiguity.

> >

> > I would love if some one can check the latest views from shri

Rath.He

> > is in agreement with Raoji ,unless wants to changes views on

amshaka.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

------

> >

> > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/865 - Release Date:

6/24/2007 8:33 AM

> >

>

June 27, 2007

Dear Satyaji

Thanks a lot for the reply.I will attend to them in detail on

Sunday ,as i will be away,as mentioned in the previous mail.

Best Regds

Pradeep

, " Satya Sai Kolachina "

<skolachi wrote:

>

> Dear Sri Pradeep and Sri Chandrasekhar,

>

> I have been following this thread on karakamsa and both of your

> contributions.

>

> I whole-heartedly appreciate both of you for your valuable inputs

> you are providing to the astrological community. I would like to

> share my opinion (through my own experience).

>

> Considering Karakamsa from either Rasi or Navamsa chart alone most

> probably leads to erroneous results, as I found both the approaches

> working. I see the point Pradeep is making as very valuable; at the

> same time I am not against using Navamsa chart as separate chart

(of

> course without losing the context of the Rasi chart), since any of

> the varga charts will not give independent results if the Rasi

chart

> is ignored, as they themselves do not exist if the Rasi chart

> doesn't exist. In fact Sri KN Rao also mentioned in several

> occassions in many of his articles and books that yogas viewed in

> the Rasi chart should also exist in the Navamsa chart for

confirming

> the results. If we do not see the Navamsa chart as a separate

chart,

> how can we see the yogas therein? For the purpose of checking some

> yogas, Yuti and Veekshana (conjunction and aspects) in the navamsa

> chart make sense. This kind of yuti or veekshana should be

> considered on a hypothetical level (as mutual influence at the

> amsha level) rather than being within a 30 deg. span. of Rasi.

>

> Take an example. If a planet is exlated or in own house in the rasi

> chart and attains debilitation in the Navamsa chart, it is

condiered

> as weakening of the actual strength shown in the Rasi. Why is this

> considered so? It is considered like that because, even though the

> planet is within its own or exlated rasi, still its positioning

> within that particular sector (here navamsa) has weakened it;

means,

> within its own rasi, this particular sector is the weakest point

for

> the planet within the strongest rasi; hence it loses its strength

> considerably. This means there is a gradation of strengths for the

> planet from first navamsa to the last navamsa. The navamsa position

> of a planet, thus indicates its refined placement within the rasi.

> In fact, Sri KN Rao also gives equal weightage to both the Rasi and

> Navamsa placement of a planet. If a planet is weak in one of them

> that means half the weightage is lost. We may not give the same

> level of treatment to other vargas as we give to Navamsa; but

> Navamsa is as important as the Rasi; to the extent that it can be

> viewed as an independent chart (to confirm the promise given by the

> rasi chart).

>

> Without a confirmation of Navamsa chart, yogas in the rasi chart

> alone cannot and will not give expected results; I have observed

> this phenomenon in several charts.

>

> My own experience is; I have Chandra and Sukra both in the 12th

> house from Karakamsa in the Navamsa chart (not in the rasi chart

> with the rasi of karakamsa considering as the karakamsa lagna). I

am

> a deep devotee of Goddess Parvathi (represented by Chandra) and

> Goddess Lakshmi (represented by Sukra). If the karakamsa is brought

> to the Rasi chart, this cannot be explained. The sequence of my

life

> events are better explained only if I consider karakamsa lagna in

> the navamsa chart; I am not discounting Pradeep's opinion here; I

am

> just saying that both approaches need to be considered on the

chart,

> and a composite opinion be formed, as Sri KN Rao always says.

>

> On the other hand, considering the specific rasi in the Rasi chart

> that holds karakamsa as the karakamsa lagna, my Sukra is in the 4th

> house indicating my possession of a nice beautiful house, and

> education/skills in arts (in addition to other traditional

> education).

>

> I am bringing this to both your knowledge only to summarize that

> both your theories give results; but not necessarily in isolation

of

> the other.

>

> Thanks for all your contribution.

>

> Best regards,

> Satya S Kolachina

>

> , Chandrashekhar

> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > I can not comment on views of either Sanjay or K. N. Rao. First

> there is

> > no difference in the meaning of Amsha and Amshaka though it is

> perhaps

> > being confused. It also needs to be remembered that in

> astrological

> > translations many a times words are to be understood in the

> context that

> > they used. So we find Parashara mentioning karakamsha and Swamsha

> in

> > alternate lines (almost) while indicating the results of

> occupation of

> > Karakamsha by Sun etc. and many other places in karakamsha

> adhyaaya.

> > This does not mean he is speaking about two different parameters.

> I

> > think if any Sanskrit scholar who is also well versed in

> interpretation

> > of astrological texts will confirm this contention of mine if he

> is

> > watching this discussion.

> >

> > If you want my personal opinion, I think that the results

> indicated on

> > the basis of Karakamsha without reference to the potential

> promised by

> > the rasi chart and the strength derived by the grahas in rasi

> chart,

> > through the Navamsha chart, are not likely to materialize. I hope

> this

> > opinion of mine does not create a big storm in the discussion on

> the

> > list. But this is my personal opinion, for whatever it is worth.

> >

> > Take care,

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji and Respected members

> > >

> > > Shri Sanjay Rath clearly says ,Amshaka is pointing to the Rashi

> in

> > > which a graha is having amsha.He also says,Karakamsha has one

> > > meaning ,while Karakamsha KA has another meaning.

> > > Chandrashekhar jis view is Amshaka is not pointing to the Rashi

> in

> > > which a graha is having amsha.

> > >

> > > Now Chandraekhar jis view is prudent as there are some shlokas

> which

> > > shri Rath somehow has overlooked,contradicting his view point.

> > >

> > > I respect shri Rath ,but i have to tell this.Sometimes the

> answer and

> > > explanations given by shri Rath are not preceded by proper

> study.They

> > > are just local(not global) answers and deals the question in a

> > > temporal way.

> > >

> > > Now if Shri Rath is not changing his opinion about amshaka,then

> all

> > > the students who want to trust him blinldy will be in

> trouble.why?

> > > In BPHS amsha and amshaka are used in a similar context in

> adjacent

> > > shlokas.If shri Rath sticks to his opinion it is approval for

> > > K.N.Raojis views.

> > >

> > > I will quote Pramana now.

> > >

> > > Karakamsha Phaladhyaya -

> > >

> > > ''Vrishamsha KA gathe'' Mithunamsha Gathe, Karkamshe ,Tulamshe

> etc

> > > are used in the same context.Now as per shri Rath Taurus Amshas

> have

> > > to be read from Rashi while the rest in navamsha arrangement.!!!

> > > Definitely overlooked.

> > >

> > > My view is they all refer to the Rashis on to which, karaka

> Graha is

> > > having amsha.Reason - At the very beginning sage says ''Meshadi

> > > RashiGE Swamshe''.Moreover they are used in exchange.

> > >

> > > The texts that i have quoted from,in local language,clearly

> explains

> > > how amshas are to be read.The whole arrangement is termed as

> amshakam

> > > and sometimes drawn outside the rashi chakra itself.

> > >

> > > Now Chandrashekhar ji

> > >

> > > In your chart,Shani is AK and is Vargottama ,thus shani is

> placed in

> > > your Karakamsha Rashi.

> > >

> > > Now you have Guru and Chandra in the 5th from Karakamsha Rashi -

> > > Veda/Vedanta Philosophy and authorship are mentioned in

classics.

> > > Guru will give you traditional paramparic knowledge - You got it

> > > from your father.

> > >

> > > Now there are many shlokas talking about yuti of planets in the

> 12th

> > > from karakamsha.When planets placed in different rashis unite

in

> a

> > > single navamsha -do you think it is Yuthi.It is certainly

> not.They

> > > are having amshaka in the same Rashi.

> > >

> > > I feel there is no reason at all for ambiguity.

> > >

> > > I would love if some one can check the latest views from shri

> Rath.He

> > > is in agreement with Raoji ,unless wants to changes views on

> amshaka.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > > -------------------------------

-

> -------

> > >

> > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/865 - Release Date:

> 6/24/2007 8:33 AM

> > >

> >

June 28, 2007

Dear Friends,

I am late in joining this debate, but will someone enlighten me, of the exact

point that is being debated.

regards,

Manoj

Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46 wrote: