Guest guest Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Dear Respected members I would like to recall the attention of members again to the following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna Shadvargake Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due attention and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the six divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it constitutes a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the strength of the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi drishti (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half and quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti based on houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no grades of aspects. Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall on different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can aspect those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about Vargas and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not translate the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no scope to translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote the following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here. I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further on this controversial aspect I leave it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake -pointing to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were trying to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion that Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the fundamental definition from Parashara. Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But why did contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as vargas too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all fall within the Rashi chakra. But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating his greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can happen. If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different story. If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted properly!! If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand these in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back to Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per them in certain cases. In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra as explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and leave it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls as all of us are in the same path. Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser to rub out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did is not necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to justice''. Kind Regds and thanks for your patience Pradeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Dear Pradeep ji Your note: *** Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser to rub out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did is not necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to justice''. *** Excellent .. I just loved it. regards / Prafulla , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Respected members > > I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna Shadvargake > Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due attention > and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > > Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the six > divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it constitutes > a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the strength of > the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi drishti > (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half and > quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti based on > houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no grades of > aspects. > > Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall on > different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can aspect > those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not > mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about Vargas > and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > > Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not translate > the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no scope to > translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote the > following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here. I > am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional > charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal aspectual > evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further on > this controversial aspect I leave > it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > > Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his > asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - pointing > to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > > I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were trying > to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion that > Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > fundamental definition from Parashara. > > Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But why did > contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as vargas > too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all fall > within the Rashi chakra. > > But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating his > greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects > in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can happen. > > If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different story. > > If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted > properly!! > > If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand these > in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back to > Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to > rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per them > in certain cases. > > In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra as > explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > > I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and leave > it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > > There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls as all > of us are in the same path. > > Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > > ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser to rub > out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did is not > necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > justice''. > > Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > Pradeep > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2007 Report Share Posted July 5, 2007 Dear Pradeep, You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been better if you had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. I have only a small question. If there are no divisional charts to be drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded by Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of grahas? I would also like your comments on how to interpret " AkshavedaaMshake caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the results related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no charts are to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe shubhe vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato raajaa bhavati nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the Karakamsha and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be interpreted to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an over fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk about drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not talk about varying strengths of drishtis. I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the shloka quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to say. And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for Ghati lagna, Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So the theory being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be drawn up is not very correct, at least within the parameters of what Parashara said. The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM ca lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me tatra te sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Respected members > > I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna Shadvargake > Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due attention > and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > > Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the six > divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it constitutes > a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the strength of > the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi drishti > (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half and > quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti based on > houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no grades of > aspects. > > Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall on > different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can aspect > those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not > mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about Vargas > and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > > Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not translate > the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no scope to > translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote the > following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here. I > am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional > charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal aspectual > evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further on > this controversial aspect I leave > it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > > Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his > asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake -pointing > to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > > I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were trying > to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion that > Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > fundamental definition from Parashara. > > Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But why did > contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as vargas > too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all fall > within the Rashi chakra. > > But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating his > greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects > in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can happen. > > If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different story. > > If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted > properly!! > > If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand these > in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back to > Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to > rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per them > in certain cases. > > In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra as > explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > > I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and leave > it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > > There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls as all > of us are in the same path. > > Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > > ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser to rub > out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did is not > necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > justice''. > > Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > Pradeep > > > ------ > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release 7/4/2007 1:40 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 Chandrashekhar ji As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects and other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi chakra. I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a piece of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can mention navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used to do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in corresponding rashis. There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet falling in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha of a planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains the usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi chakra. On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet (not shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used for assessing any purpose in general. In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha shashtyamshas are mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general for all purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only amshas are used. Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from which one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as they are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern raised by Late santhanam. On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points can change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts but it makes no difference. Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the rashi on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi on to which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the strength of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am trying to convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is having navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said garaha in delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or joining such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to which our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having amsha (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha grahas - Rajayoga results. I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he takes this as a request. The other full shloka is Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama Now the gradation Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha drishti. On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira list or so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having identical views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising the misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a short stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty sure that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get swayed so easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good lessons for me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my mind i feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly pardon. Respect Pradeep , Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > Dear Pradeep, > > You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been better if you > had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. > > I have only a small question. If there are no divisional charts to be > drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded by > Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of grahas? > > I would also like your comments on how to interpret " AkshavedaaMshake > caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the results > related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no charts are > to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe shubhe > vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato raajaa bhavati > nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the Karakamsha > and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be interpreted > to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an over > fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk about > drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not talk about > varying strengths of drishtis. > > I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the shloka > quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to say. > > And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for Ghati lagna, > Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So the theory > being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be drawn up is > not very correct, at least within the parameters of what Parashara said. > The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM ca > lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me tatra te > sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > Dear Respected members > > > > I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > > following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna Shadvargake > > Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due attention > > and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > > > > Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the six > > divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it constitutes > > a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the strength of > > the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi drishti > > (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half and > > quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti based on > > houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no grades of > > aspects. > > > > Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > > mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall on > > different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can aspect > > those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not > > mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about Vargas > > and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > > > > Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not translate > > the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no scope to > > translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote the > > following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here. I > > am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional > > charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal aspectual > > evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further on > > this controversial aspect I leave > > it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > > > > Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > > referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his > > asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - pointing > > to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > > > > I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were trying > > to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion that > > Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > > fundamental definition from Parashara. > > > > Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > > yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But why did > > contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as vargas > > too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all fall > > within the Rashi chakra. > > > > But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating his > > greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects > > in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > > longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > > Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can happen. > > > > If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > > manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > > mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different story. > > > > If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > > Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted > > properly!! > > > > If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand these > > in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back to > > Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to > > rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per them > > in certain cases. > > > > In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra as > > explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > > > > I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and leave > > it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > > > > There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls as all > > of us are in the same path. > > > > Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > > > > ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser to rub > > out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did is not > > necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > > justice''. > > > > Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > > Pradeep > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release Date: 7/4/2007 1:40 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 Pradeep, I think the way I read a classic is different from yours and that could be due to the generation gap. I have not understood how a Shashtyamsha of a graha can tell everything about a jataka, as advised by Parashara, not the akshavedamsha. If one has to understand everything about a jataka one will have to analyze the bhavas and placement of bhava lords. So if one has to understand everything about a jataka one will have to look at the ShashtyaMsha chart or Akshavedamsha chart only. As to the occupation of a graha of a krura or shubha shastyamsha is concerned that refers to the bhava owned by that graha in the Rasi chart and that has nothing to do with the shashtyamsha or akshavedaamsha chart. The reason is easier to understand if we see that if a graha that is a malefic occupies the trishadaaya sthanas in the rasi chart it is said to give good results so the results will not be bad for that sthana if the said graha occupies a malefic Shashtyamsha. At the same time the bhava owned by it could suffer as that would be a different rasi than the trishadaaya sthana occupied (unless the malefic is occupying own rasi in such a sthana). By the way, I have seen too many south indian charts where Navamsha placement of grahas in a chart to accept that South Indians only write navamshas just outside the rasi chakra, as mentioned by you. Even Dr. Raman,s books do not show navamsha that way. As to rasi chakra being the only skeleton where rules like bhavas etc. can be used, could you give your comments on Parashara advising to draw Ghati, Bhava and Hora lagna chakra in the same manner as the rasi chakra? Do you think he was wrong? Karakamsha is most certainly not the Rasi in which a graha has amsha. It is the Navamsha occupied, in a rasi, by a planet that has traversed the most number of Amshas in any rasi. The reason for the Raj yoga is obvious, the only point of difference amongst scholars is whether the Lagnamsha is to be seen in rasi chakra or navamsha chakra and same for the karakamsha. I can not take Karakamsha to mean rasi, unfortunately. As far as I know the word amsha without context is generally related to Navamsha or Dwadashaamsha. I have never seen it being used to indicate rasi. Take care, Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know > that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects and > other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi chakra. > > I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a piece > of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can mention > navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used to > do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in > corresponding rashis. > > There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet falling > in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha of a > planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains the > usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi chakra. > > On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet (not > shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used for > assessing any purpose in general. > In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha shashtyamshas are > mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general for all > purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only amshas > are used. > > Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from which > one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as they > are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern raised by > Late santhanam. > On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points can > change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora > Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same > skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts but it > makes no difference. > > Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the rashi > on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi on to > which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the > perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha > placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. > > If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the strength > of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am trying to > convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is having > navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said garaha in > delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or joining > such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to which > our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having amsha > (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha grahas - > Rajayoga results. > > I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he takes this > as a request. > > The other full shloka is > > Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe > Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama > > Now the gradation > Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha > Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam > > Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha drishti. > > On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira list or > so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having identical > views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising the > misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a short > stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty sure > that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get swayed so > easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good lessons for > me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my mind i > feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly pardon. > > Respect > Pradeep > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been better > if you > > had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. > > > > I have only a small question. If there are no divisional charts to > be > > drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded by > > Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of grahas? > > > > I would also like your comments on how to > interpret " AkshavedaaMshake > > caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the > results > > related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no charts > are > > to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe shubhe > > vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato raajaa > bhavati > > nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the > Karakamsha > > and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be > interpreted > > to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an over > > fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk about > > drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not talk > about > > varying strengths of drishtis. > > > > I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the > shloka > > quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to say. > > > > And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for Ghati > lagna, > > Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So the > theory > > being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be drawn up > is > > not very correct, at least within the parameters of what Parashara > said. > > The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM ca > > lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me tatra te > > sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > Dear Respected members > > > > > > I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > > > following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna Shadvargake > > > Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due attention > > > and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > > > > > > Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the six > > > divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it > constitutes > > > a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the strength of > > > the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi drishti > > > (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half and > > > quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti based on > > > houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no grades > of > > > aspects. > > > > > > Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > > > mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall on > > > different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can > aspect > > > those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not > > > mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about > Vargas > > > and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > > > > > > Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not > translate > > > the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no scope to > > > translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote the > > > following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here. I > > > am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional > > > charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal aspectual > > > evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further on > > > this controversial aspect I leave > > > it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > > > > > > Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > > > referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his > > > asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - > pointing > > > to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > > > > > > I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were > trying > > > to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion that > > > Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > > > fundamental definition from Parashara. > > > > > > Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > > > yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But why > did > > > contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as vargas > > > too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all fall > > > within the Rashi chakra. > > > > > > But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating his > > > greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects > > > in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > > > longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > > > Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can happen. > > > > > > If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > > > manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > > > mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different > story. > > > > > > If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > > > Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted > > > properly!! > > > > > > If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand > these > > > in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back to > > > Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to > > > rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per them > > > in certain cases. > > > > > > In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra as > > > explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > > > > > > I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and > leave > > > it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > > > > > > There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls as > all > > > of us are in the same path. > > > > > > Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > > > > > > ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser to > rub > > > out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did is > not > > > necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > > > justice''. > > > > > > Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release Date: > 7/4/2007 1:40 PM > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 Dear Chandrashekhar ji Rashi/Kshethra/Riksha/Bhavana are synonyms.Thus i would prefer to take bhavas only from Rashi chakra.I have not seen any refrences bout house but amshas always. I can find the shashtyamsha of every bhava lord-similar to what we see with navamsha etc.It is not for any specific purpose like marriage or children.Shubha shashtyamshas and dities have deeper meaning.I feel you would agree that through Rashi chakra you can see anything and everything of a Jataka. If you may note i have mentioned that,you can represnt ehe amshas as we wish.How we interpret various relationships that a planet is having on 12 rashis is that interests me.South inidans do both. Again if you note,i have clearly mentioned that you can see bhavat bhavam and any 30 degree sector can be a lagna.Even if you draw them a seperate charts,ther is no difference.I just said rashi chakra -did not say only from natal lagna.Not only hora or Ghatika,you can take from chandra/surya/arudha lagna navamsha,karakamsha lagna etc from rashi chakra.on the other hand dispositions seen from amsha arrangement does not fall in linw with basic definitions.They are amsha-rashi links.Thus shri Santhanam had raised concern. I have given many references like paparkshe which clearly means rashi,but you have different opinion.It is ok with me.Rashige is also not acceptable.It is ok with me.Shri Rath has said amshaka has to be seen from rashi - i have seen clear demonstrations and explanations to students of the same.But yoo feel different.I have shown references from BPHS that amshaka and amsha means the same.Neither shri Rath any of the students here was caring.They were all negelecting classical references.It is ok for me. You may think and arrive at whatever conclusions you may like.If any member reading this see any merit,i am thankful.If not,that is ok too. Respect Pradeep , Chandrashekhar <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > Dear Pradeep, > > I think the way I read a classic is different from yours and that could > be due to the generation gap. I have not understood how a Shashtyamsha > of a graha can tell everything about a jataka, as advised by Parashara, > not the akshavedamsha. If one has to understand everything about a > jataka one will have to analyze the bhavas and placement of bhava lords. > So if one has to understand everything about a jataka one will have to > look at the ShashtyaMsha chart or Akshavedamsha chart only. As to the > occupation of a graha of a krura or shubha shastyamsha is concerned that > refers to the bhava owned by that graha in the Rasi chart and that has > nothing to do with the shashtyamsha or akshavedaamsha chart. The reason > is easier to understand if we see that if a graha that is a malefic > occupies the trishadaaya sthanas in the rasi chart it is said to give > good results so the results will not be bad for that sthana if the said > graha occupies a malefic Shashtyamsha. At the same time the bhava owned > by it could suffer as that would be a different rasi than the > trishadaaya sthana occupied (unless the malefic is occupying own rasi in > such a sthana). > > By the way, I have seen too many south indian charts where Navamsha > placement of grahas in a chart to accept that South Indians only write > navamshas just outside the rasi chakra, as mentioned by you. Even Dr. > Raman,s books do not show navamsha that way. > > As to rasi chakra being the only skeleton where rules like bhavas etc. > can be used, could you give your comments on Parashara advising to draw > Ghati, Bhava and Hora lagna chakra in the same manner as the rasi > chakra? Do you think he was wrong? > > Karakamsha is most certainly not the Rasi in which a graha has amsha. It > is the Navamsha occupied, in a rasi, by a planet that has traversed the > most number of Amshas in any rasi. > > The reason for the Raj yoga is obvious, the only point of difference > amongst scholars is whether the Lagnamsha is to be seen in rasi chakra > or navamsha chakra and same for the karakamsha. I can not take > Karakamsha to mean rasi, unfortunately. As far as I know the word amsha > without context is generally related to Navamsha or Dwadashaamsha. I > have never seen it being used to indicate rasi. > > Take care, > Chandrashekhar. > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know > > that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects and > > other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi chakra. > > > > I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a piece > > of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can mention > > navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used to > > do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in > > corresponding rashis. > > > > There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet falling > > in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha of a > > planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains the > > usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi chakra. > > > > On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet (not > > shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used for > > assessing any purpose in general. > > In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha shashtyamshas are > > mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general for all > > purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only amshas > > are used. > > > > Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from which > > one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as they > > are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern raised by > > Late santhanam. > > On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points can > > change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora > > Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same > > skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts but it > > makes no difference. > > > > Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the rashi > > on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi on to > > which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the > > perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha > > placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. > > > > If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the strength > > of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am trying to > > convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is having > > navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said garaha in > > delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or joining > > such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to which > > our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having amsha > > (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha grahas - > > Rajayoga results. > > > > I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he takes this > > as a request. > > > > The other full shloka is > > > > Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe > > Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama > > > > Now the gradation > > Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha > > Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam > > > > Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha drishti. > > > > On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira list or > > so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having identical > > views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising the > > misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a short > > stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty sure > > that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get swayed so > > easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good lessons for > > me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my mind i > > feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly pardon. > > > > Respect > > Pradeep > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been better > > if you > > > had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. > > > > > > I have only a small question. If there are no divisional charts to > > be > > > drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded by > > > Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of grahas? > > > > > > I would also like your comments on how to > > interpret " AkshavedaaMshake > > > caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the > > results > > > related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no charts > > are > > > to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe shubhe > > > vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato raajaa > > bhavati > > > nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the > > Karakamsha > > > and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be > > interpreted > > > to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an over > > > fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk about > > > drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not talk > > about > > > varying strengths of drishtis. > > > > > > I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the > > shloka > > > quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to say. > > > > > > And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for Ghati > > lagna, > > > Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So the > > theory > > > being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be drawn up > > is > > > not very correct, at least within the parameters of what Parashara > > said. > > > The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM ca > > > lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me tatra te > > > sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Respected members > > > > > > > > I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > > > > following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna Shadvargake > > > > Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due attention > > > > and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > > > > > > > > Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the six > > > > divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it > > constitutes > > > > a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the strength of > > > > the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi drishti > > > > (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half and > > > > quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti based on > > > > houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no grades > > of > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > > > > mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall on > > > > different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can > > aspect > > > > those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not > > > > mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about > > Vargas > > > > and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > > > > > > > > Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not > > translate > > > > the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no scope to > > > > translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote the > > > > following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here. I > > > > am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional > > > > charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal aspectual > > > > evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further on > > > > this controversial aspect I leave > > > > it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > > > > > > > > Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > > > > referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his > > > > asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - > > pointing > > > > to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > > > > > > > > I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were > > trying > > > > to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion that > > > > Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > > > > fundamental definition from Parashara. > > > > > > > > Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > > > > yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But why > > did > > > > contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as vargas > > > > too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all fall > > > > within the Rashi chakra. > > > > > > > > But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating his > > > > greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects > > > > in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > > > > longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > > > > Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can happen. > > > > > > > > If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > > > > manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > > > > mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different > > story. > > > > > > > > If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > > > > Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted > > > > properly!! > > > > > > > > If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand > > these > > > > in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back to > > > > Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to > > > > rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per them > > > > in certain cases. > > > > > > > > In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra as > > > > explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > > > > > > > > I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and > > leave > > > > it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > > > > > > > > There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls as > > all > > > > of us are in the same path. > > > > > > > > Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > > > > > > > > ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser to > > rub > > > > out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did is > > not > > > > necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > > > > justice''. > > > > > > > > Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release Date: > > 7/4/2007 1:40 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 Dear pradeep ji I am not getting into your interpretation. But am presenting you another rationale. We all know the relevance of longitudinal reference in aspects (well - western astrology has used it with more reference to its degrees and longitudinal difference) and Vedic astrology has used bhava / rashi ( I am not getting into D1 / D9 / D10 issue here) based aspects (e.g. 4th / 8th bhava / rashi from mars as additional aspects etc). But just plot them in degrees in chart..and go to D charts, and see their mutual relations. Else, relevance of navapancham relationship as most vital for any planet can not be derived. Just explore it and may be we are sitting with different conclusion. But you got to apply them in prediction..not in theory. regards / Prafulla Gang http://www.prafulla.net " Men who never get carried away should be. " ************************************************ > > vijayadas_pradeep > Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:58:41 -0000 > > Re: Lagna Shadvargake Shloka - A Revisit > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > Rashi/Kshethra/Riksha/Bhavana are synonyms.Thus i would prefer to > take bhavas only from Rashi chakra.I have not seen any refrences bout > house but amshas always. > > I can find the shashtyamsha of every bhava lord-similar to what we > see with navamsha etc.It is not for any specific purpose like > marriage or children.Shubha shashtyamshas and dities have deeper > meaning.I feel you would agree that through Rashi chakra you can see > anything and everything of a Jataka. > > If you may note i have mentioned that,you can represnt ehe amshas as > we wish.How we interpret various relationships that a planet is > having on 12 rashis is that interests me.South inidans do both. > > Again if you note,i have clearly mentioned that you can see bhavat > bhavam and any 30 degree sector can be a lagna.Even if you draw them > a seperate charts,ther is no difference.I just said rashi chakra -did > not say only from natal lagna.Not only hora or Ghatika,you can take > from chandra/surya/arudha lagna navamsha,karakamsha lagna etc from > rashi chakra.on the other hand dispositions seen from amsha > arrangement does not fall in linw with basic definitions.They are > amsha-rashi links.Thus shri Santhanam had raised concern. > > I have given many references like paparkshe which clearly means > rashi,but you have different opinion.It is ok with me.Rashige is also > not acceptable.It is ok with me.Shri Rath has said amshaka has to be > seen from rashi - i have seen clear demonstrations and explanations > to students of the same.But yoo feel different.I have shown > references from BPHS that amshaka and amsha means the same.Neither > shri Rath any of the students here was caring.They were all > negelecting classical references.It is ok for me. > You may think and arrive at whatever conclusions you may like.If any > member reading this see any merit,i am thankful.If not,that is ok too. > > Respect > Pradeep > , Chandrashekhar > <chandrashekhar46 wrote: >> >> Dear Pradeep, >> >> I think the way I read a classic is different from yours and that > could >> be due to the generation gap. I have not understood how a > Shashtyamsha >> of a graha can tell everything about a jataka, as advised by > Parashara, >> not the akshavedamsha. If one has to understand everything about a >> jataka one will have to analyze the bhavas and placement of bhava > lords. >> So if one has to understand everything about a jataka one will have > to >> look at the ShashtyaMsha chart or Akshavedamsha chart only. As to > the >> occupation of a graha of a krura or shubha shastyamsha is concerned > that >> refers to the bhava owned by that graha in the Rasi chart and that > has >> nothing to do with the shashtyamsha or akshavedaamsha chart. The > reason >> is easier to understand if we see that if a graha that is a malefic >> occupies the trishadaaya sthanas in the rasi chart it is said to > give >> good results so the results will not be bad for that sthana if the > said >> graha occupies a malefic Shashtyamsha. At the same time the bhava > owned >> by it could suffer as that would be a different rasi than the >> trishadaaya sthana occupied (unless the malefic is occupying own > rasi in >> such a sthana). >> >> By the way, I have seen too many south indian charts where Navamsha >> placement of grahas in a chart to accept that South Indians only > write >> navamshas just outside the rasi chakra, as mentioned by you. Even > Dr. >> Raman,s books do not show navamsha that way. >> >> As to rasi chakra being the only skeleton where rules like bhavas > etc. >> can be used, could you give your comments on Parashara advising to > draw >> Ghati, Bhava and Hora lagna chakra in the same manner as the rasi >> chakra? Do you think he was wrong? >> >> Karakamsha is most certainly not the Rasi in which a graha has > amsha. It >> is the Navamsha occupied, in a rasi, by a planet that has > traversed the >> most number of Amshas in any rasi. >> >> The reason for the Raj yoga is obvious, the only point of > difference >> amongst scholars is whether the Lagnamsha is to be seen in rasi > chakra >> or navamsha chakra and same for the karakamsha. I can not take >> Karakamsha to mean rasi, unfortunately. As far as I know the word > amsha >> without context is generally related to Navamsha or Dwadashaamsha. > I >> have never seen it being used to indicate rasi. >> >> Take care, >> Chandrashekhar. >> >> >> >> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >>> >>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji >>> >>> As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know >>> that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects and >>> other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi chakra. >>> >>> I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a > piece >>> of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can mention >>> navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used to >>> do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in >>> corresponding rashis. >>> >>> There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet > falling >>> in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha of > a >>> planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains > the >>> usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi > chakra. >>> >>> On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet (not >>> shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used > for >>> assessing any purpose in general. >>> In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha shashtyamshas > are >>> mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general for > all >>> purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only > amshas >>> are used. >>> >>> Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from > which >>> one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as > they >>> are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern raised by >>> Late santhanam. >>> On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points can >>> change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora >>> Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same >>> skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts but > it >>> makes no difference. >>> >>> Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the > rashi >>> on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi > on to >>> which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the >>> perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha >>> placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. >>> >>> If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the > strength >>> of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am > trying to >>> convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is having >>> navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said > garaha in >>> delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or joining >>> such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to > which >>> our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having > amsha >>> (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha grahas - >>> Rajayoga results. >>> >>> I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he takes > this >>> as a request. >>> >>> The other full shloka is >>> >>> Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe >>> Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama >>> >>> Now the gradation >>> Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha >>> Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam >>> >>> Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha drishti. >>> >>> On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira list or >>> so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having identical >>> views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising the >>> misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a > short >>> stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty sure >>> that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get swayed > so >>> easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good lessons > for >>> me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my mind > i >>> feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly > pardon. >>> >>> Respect >>> Pradeep >>> >>> >>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar >>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Pradeep, >>>> >>>> You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been > better >>> if you >>>> had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. >>>> >>>> I have only a small question. If there are no divisional charts > to >>> be >>>> drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded by >>>> Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of grahas? >>>> >>>> I would also like your comments on how to >>> interpret " AkshavedaaMshake >>>> caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the >>> results >>>> related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no > charts >>> are >>>> to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe > shubhe >>>> vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato raajaa >>> bhavati >>>> nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the >>> Karakamsha >>>> and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be >>> interpreted >>>> to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an > over >>>> fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk about >>>> drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not > talk >>> about >>>> varying strengths of drishtis. >>>> >>>> I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the >>> shloka >>>> quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to say. >>>> >>>> And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for > Ghati >>> lagna, >>>> Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So the >>> theory >>>> being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be > drawn up >>> is >>>> not very correct, at least within the parameters of what > Parashara >>> said. >>>> The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM ca >>>> lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me > tatra te >>>> sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . >>>> >>>> >>>> Chandrashekhar. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear Respected members >>>>> >>>>> I would like to recall the attention of members again to the >>>>> following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna > Shadvargake >>>>> Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due > attention >>>>> and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. >>>>> >>>>> Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the > six >>>>> divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it >>> constitutes >>>>> a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the > strength of >>>>> the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi > drishti >>>>> (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half > and >>>>> quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti > based on >>>>> houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no > grades >>> of >>>>> aspects. >>>>> >>>>> Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is >>>>> mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall > on >>>>> different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can >>> aspect >>>>> those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not >>>>> mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about >>> Vargas >>>>> and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. >>>>> >>>>> Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not >>> translate >>>>> the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no > scope to >>>>> translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote > the >>>>> following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts > here. I >>>>> am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional >>>>> charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal > aspectual >>>>> evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further > on >>>>> this controversial aspect I leave >>>>> it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " >>>>> >>>>> Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are >>>>> referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his >>>>> asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - >>> pointing >>>>> to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. >>>>> >>>>> I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were >>> trying >>>>> to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion > that >>>>> Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the >>>>> fundamental definition from Parashara. >>>>> >>>>> Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of >>>>> yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But > why >>> did >>>>> contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as > vargas >>>>> too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all > fall >>>>> within the Rashi chakra. >>>>> >>>>> But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating > his >>>>> greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in > aspects >>>>> in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the >>>>> longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. >>>>> Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can > happen. >>>>> >>>>> If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes >>>>> manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had >>>>> mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different >>> story. >>>>> >>>>> If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni >>>>> Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted >>>>> properly!! >>>>> >>>>> If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand >>> these >>>>> in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back > to >>>>> Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to >>>>> rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per > them >>>>> in certain cases. >>>>> >>>>> In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra > as >>>>> explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. >>>>> >>>>> I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and >>> leave >>>>> it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. >>>>> >>>>> There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls > as >>> all >>>>> of us are in the same path. >>>>> >>>>> Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - >>>>> >>>>> ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser > to >>> rub >>>>> out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did > is >>> not >>>>> necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to >>>>> justice''. >>>>> >>>>> Kind Regds and thanks for your patience >>>>> Pradeep >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------- >>> ------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release > Date: >>> 7/4/2007 1:40 PM >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 Dear Prafulla ji Do you think ,i am not using them in predictions.I have a good collection of charts with me and i am fortunate to get new charts very frequently.I am extensively studying with the help of charts.You can see numerous quizzes in which i have participated using amshas alone. You can see the prediction given on Gordon Brown 2 years back.Transit amshas,dasha all are given in this list and with God's grace,it has come true.I have given many private predictions and with the grace of GOD and the gurus who have guided me they have come true.If i am not boasting them in front of you,it doesnt mean i am not seeing charts. It is not at all a western concept regarding longitudinal aspects.Pls read the views of Late Santhanam the very translator of BPHS and the discussions that i had with shri PVR Rao. Please dont go with a concluded mind.Try to see if there is any substance in what i am saying.For eg inspite of writing so many mails ,Bhaskar ji is talking about Sun and Moon Lagnas and imaginary lagnas etc. Is anyone prepared to read ans ubnderstand.Is sun lagna imaginary? Moon lagna imgainary? They are placements.Imaginary is the link between amsha and Rashi. If no body is prepared to read hard work and pramanas then there is no use at all in these discussons. Shri K.N.Rao has told in this list many times that one who cannot predict with rashi chakra can never learn astrology.Amshas as per me will confirm the promises and help us in judging the grade of yoga.Good and bad amshas of relevant bhava lords and corresponding dashas will help us.Chara/sthira nature of amsha-rashi will help us. nature of amsha lord will help us.The number of navamshas elapsed will help us.In which bhava a planet is having navamsha will help us. Eg in my case,sun mercury conjunct as 9th and 10th lords in rashi.But their amshas fall in the 10th and 9th houses of rashi chakra respectively.Thus they have exchanged Rashis as far as amsha sambandha is concerned.Sun is having amsha in 10th and mercury in 9th. For me sun and mercury antaras brought good. So pls don't assume i am not checking charts.I get numerous personal mails from list members and i try to reply back to the best of my ability. Regds Pradeep -- In , Prafulla Gang <jyotish wrote: > > Dear pradeep ji > > I am not getting into your interpretation. But am presenting you another rationale. > > We all know the relevance of longitudinal reference in aspects (well - western astrology has used it with more reference to its degrees and longitudinal difference) and Vedic astrology has used bhava / rashi ( I am not getting into D1 / D9 / D10 issue here) based aspects (e.g. 4th / 8th bhava / rashi from mars as additional aspects etc). > > But just plot them in degrees in chart..and go to D charts, and see their mutual relations. Else, relevance of navapancham relationship as most vital for any planet can not be derived. Just explore it and may be we are sitting with different conclusion. But you got to apply them in prediction..not in theory. > > regards / Prafulla Gang > http://www.prafulla.net > > " Men who never get carried away should be. " > ************************************************ > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep > > Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:58:41 -0000 > > > > Re: Lagna Shadvargake Shloka - A Revisit > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > Rashi/Kshethra/Riksha/Bhavana are synonyms.Thus i would prefer to > > take bhavas only from Rashi chakra.I have not seen any refrences bout > > house but amshas always. > > > > I can find the shashtyamsha of every bhava lord-similar to what we > > see with navamsha etc.It is not for any specific purpose like > > marriage or children.Shubha shashtyamshas and dities have deeper > > meaning.I feel you would agree that through Rashi chakra you can see > > anything and everything of a Jataka. > > > > If you may note i have mentioned that,you can represnt ehe amshas as > > we wish.How we interpret various relationships that a planet is > > having on 12 rashis is that interests me.South inidans do both. > > > > Again if you note,i have clearly mentioned that you can see bhavat > > bhavam and any 30 degree sector can be a lagna.Even if you draw them > > a seperate charts,ther is no difference.I just said rashi chakra -did > > not say only from natal lagna.Not only hora or Ghatika,you can take > > from chandra/surya/arudha lagna navamsha,karakamsha lagna etc from > > rashi chakra.on the other hand dispositions seen from amsha > > arrangement does not fall in linw with basic definitions.They are > > amsha-rashi links.Thus shri Santhanam had raised concern. > > > > I have given many references like paparkshe which clearly means > > rashi,but you have different opinion.It is ok with me.Rashige is also > > not acceptable.It is ok with me.Shri Rath has said amshaka has to be > > seen from rashi - i have seen clear demonstrations and explanations > > to students of the same.But yoo feel different.I have shown > > references from BPHS that amshaka and amsha means the same.Neither > > shri Rath any of the students here was caring.They were all > > negelecting classical references.It is ok for me. > > You may think and arrive at whatever conclusions you may like.If any > > member reading this see any merit,i am thankful.If not,that is ok too. > > > > Respect > > Pradeep > > , Chandrashekhar > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > >> > >> Dear Pradeep, > >> > >> I think the way I read a classic is different from yours and that > > could > >> be due to the generation gap. I have not understood how a > > Shashtyamsha > >> of a graha can tell everything about a jataka, as advised by > > Parashara, > >> not the akshavedamsha. If one has to understand everything about a > >> jataka one will have to analyze the bhavas and placement of bhava > > lords. > >> So if one has to understand everything about a jataka one will have > > to > >> look at the ShashtyaMsha chart or Akshavedamsha chart only. As to > > the > >> occupation of a graha of a krura or shubha shastyamsha is concerned > > that > >> refers to the bhava owned by that graha in the Rasi chart and that > > has > >> nothing to do with the shashtyamsha or akshavedaamsha chart. The > > reason > >> is easier to understand if we see that if a graha that is a malefic > >> occupies the trishadaaya sthanas in the rasi chart it is said to > > give > >> good results so the results will not be bad for that sthana if the > > said > >> graha occupies a malefic Shashtyamsha. At the same time the bhava > > owned > >> by it could suffer as that would be a different rasi than the > >> trishadaaya sthana occupied (unless the malefic is occupying own > > rasi in > >> such a sthana). > >> > >> By the way, I have seen too many south indian charts where Navamsha > >> placement of grahas in a chart to accept that South Indians only > > write > >> navamshas just outside the rasi chakra, as mentioned by you. Even > > Dr. > >> Raman,s books do not show navamsha that way. > >> > >> As to rasi chakra being the only skeleton where rules like bhavas > > etc. > >> can be used, could you give your comments on Parashara advising to > > draw > >> Ghati, Bhava and Hora lagna chakra in the same manner as the rasi > >> chakra? Do you think he was wrong? > >> > >> Karakamsha is most certainly not the Rasi in which a graha has > > amsha. It > >> is the Navamsha occupied, in a rasi, by a planet that has > > traversed the > >> most number of Amshas in any rasi. > >> > >> The reason for the Raj yoga is obvious, the only point of > > difference > >> amongst scholars is whether the Lagnamsha is to be seen in rasi > > chakra > >> or navamsha chakra and same for the karakamsha. I can not take > >> Karakamsha to mean rasi, unfortunately. As far as I know the word > > amsha > >> without context is generally related to Navamsha or Dwadashaamsha. > > I > >> have never seen it being used to indicate rasi. > >> > >> Take care, > >> Chandrashekhar. > >> > >> > >> > >> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > >>> > >>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji > >>> > >>> As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know > >>> that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects and > >>> other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi chakra. > >>> > >>> I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a > > piece > >>> of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can mention > >>> navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used to > >>> do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in > >>> corresponding rashis. > >>> > >>> There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet > > falling > >>> in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha of > > a > >>> planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains > > the > >>> usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi > > chakra. > >>> > >>> On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet (not > >>> shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used > > for > >>> assessing any purpose in general. > >>> In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha shashtyamshas > > are > >>> mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general for > > all > >>> purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only > > amshas > >>> are used. > >>> > >>> Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from > > which > >>> one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as > > they > >>> are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern raised by > >>> Late santhanam. > >>> On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points can > >>> change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora > >>> Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same > >>> skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts but > > it > >>> makes no difference. > >>> > >>> Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the > > rashi > >>> on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi > > on to > >>> which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the > >>> perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha > >>> placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. > >>> > >>> If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the > > strength > >>> of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am > > trying to > >>> convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is having > >>> navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said > > garaha in > >>> delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or joining > >>> such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to > > which > >>> our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having > > amsha > >>> (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha grahas - > >>> Rajayoga results. > >>> > >>> I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he takes > > this > >>> as a request. > >>> > >>> The other full shloka is > >>> > >>> Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe > >>> Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama > >>> > >>> Now the gradation > >>> Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha > >>> Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam > >>> > >>> Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha drishti. > >>> > >>> On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira list or > >>> so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having identical > >>> views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising the > >>> misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a > > short > >>> stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty sure > >>> that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get swayed > > so > >>> easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good lessons > > for > >>> me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my mind > > i > >>> feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly > > pardon. > >>> > >>> Respect > >>> Pradeep > >>> > >>> > >>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar > >>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Dear Pradeep, > >>>> > >>>> You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been > > better > >>> if you > >>>> had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. > >>>> > >>>> I have only a small question. If there are no divisional charts > > to > >>> be > >>>> drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded by > >>>> Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of grahas? > >>>> > >>>> I would also like your comments on how to > >>> interpret " AkshavedaaMshake > >>>> caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the > >>> results > >>>> related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no > > charts > >>> are > >>>> to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe > > shubhe > >>>> vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato raajaa > >>> bhavati > >>>> nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the > >>> Karakamsha > >>>> and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be > >>> interpreted > >>>> to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an > > over > >>>> fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk about > >>>> drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not > > talk > >>> about > >>>> varying strengths of drishtis. > >>>> > >>>> I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the > >>> shloka > >>>> quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to say. > >>>> > >>>> And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for > > Ghati > >>> lagna, > >>>> Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So the > >>> theory > >>>> being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be > > drawn up > >>> is > >>>> not very correct, at least within the parameters of what > > Parashara > >>> said. > >>>> The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM ca > >>>> lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me > > tatra te > >>>> sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chandrashekhar. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Dear Respected members > >>>>> > >>>>> I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > >>>>> following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna > > Shadvargake > >>>>> Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due > > attention > >>>>> and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > >>>>> > >>>>> Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the > > six > >>>>> divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it > >>> constitutes > >>>>> a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the > > strength of > >>>>> the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi > > drishti > >>>>> (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half > > and > >>>>> quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti > > based on > >>>>> houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no > > grades > >>> of > >>>>> aspects. > >>>>> > >>>>> Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > >>>>> mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall > > on > >>>>> different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can > >>> aspect > >>>>> those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not > >>>>> mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about > >>> Vargas > >>>>> and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > >>>>> > >>>>> Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not > >>> translate > >>>>> the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no > > scope to > >>>>> translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote > > the > >>>>> following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts > > here. I > >>>>> am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional > >>>>> charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal > > aspectual > >>>>> evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further > > on > >>>>> this controversial aspect I leave > >>>>> it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > >>>>> > >>>>> Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > >>>>> referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his > >>>>> asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - > >>> pointing > >>>>> to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > >>>>> > >>>>> I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were > >>> trying > >>>>> to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion > > that > >>>>> Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > >>>>> fundamental definition from Parashara. > >>>>> > >>>>> Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > >>>>> yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But > > why > >>> did > >>>>> contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as > > vargas > >>>>> too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all > > fall > >>>>> within the Rashi chakra. > >>>>> > >>>>> But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating > > his > >>>>> greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in > > aspects > >>>>> in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > >>>>> longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > >>>>> Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can > > happen. > >>>>> > >>>>> If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > >>>>> manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > >>>>> mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different > >>> story. > >>>>> > >>>>> If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > >>>>> Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted > >>>>> properly!! > >>>>> > >>>>> If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand > >>> these > >>>>> in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back > > to > >>>>> Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to > >>>>> rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per > > them > >>>>> in certain cases. > >>>>> > >>>>> In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra > > as > >>>>> explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > >>>>> > >>>>> I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and > >>> leave > >>>>> it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > >>>>> > >>>>> There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls > > as > >>> all > >>>>> of us are in the same path. > >>>>> > >>>>> Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > >>>>> > >>>>> ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser > > to > >>> rub > >>>>> out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did > > is > >>> not > >>>>> necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > >>>>> justice''. > >>>>> > >>>>> Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > >>>>> Pradeep > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ------------------------- > >>> ------ > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release > > Date: > >>> 7/4/2007 1:40 PM > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 Though I do not wish to be a part of this thread, anymore,but since my name has appeared,let me reply. What is the Lagna ? Is it not the rising point noticed in the eastern horizon at the time of birth ? Suppose Leo rises as the Ascendant, and Mars is posited in Leo. Sun is in Gemini , and Moon is in Sagittarius. Yet we have been rightly taught to check the major ponts whether they are repeated from the Surya and Chandra Lagnas too. In above case while checking a particular matter from the Surya or Chandra Lagna, would not we be considering these Lagnas as imaginary lagnas, since actuially gemini or sagittarius has not arisen in the eastern horizon, but Leo has. Thats what I meant when I used the term imaginary points. ShriBV Raman has clearly mentioned the navamshas as imaginary points in his answer to a reply I posted earlier and posted at the end of this mail. Shri BV Raman Sahab has clearly mentioned that the Navamsha chart has imaginary points and is symbolic. (See and read his reply as below, but this is common sense). sme way Surya and Chandra Lagna are imaginary points for individual charts, when we treat the Rashis wherein teh Sun and Moon, are posited as the Lagnas. But as I mentioned earlier, the transits on these sensitive points 0f 3.20edegrees are not imaginary, when the Slower moving ones move on these, like Saturn or Jupiter. And the Navamsha chart is basically used to consider the strength of the various planets and certain derivations. Another point- Rashi is sidderent and Amsha is different. Amsha is a prt of the rashi. rashi can contain the amsha but amsha cannot contain the Rashi. Personal comments- rashi chart is not the best choice for prediction. bhava chalit is better and so is Navamsha. In fact these 3 have to be combined, and one cannot undermine the importance of any. the great nadi predictions of yore were not based on Rashi alone, but on the degreecal compartments of the planets and the sign cusps. But that is another story..... regards, bhaskar. ---- A Catechism of Astrology, by BV Raman. Question No, 70- Why si the Navamsha Chakra considered as being of equal importance to Rasi in matter of prediction ? Answer by BV Raman- In rasi Chakra, planets are placed according to their astronomical positions, in the Zodiac. In the Navamsha chakra, which is considered to be second in importance only to the Rasi chakra, the planets are arranged according to the subdivisions in which they are found and named in order of signs beginning from Aries. This is familiar to all students. Beyond giving the positions of the planets and Lagna correct to 3 1/4 degrees, an INDEPENDENT CHART IS PREPARED , and considered ALONGWITH RASI kUNDALI. No doubt the positions in the Navamsha Chart are imaginary if their relative positions are alone taken into account. But we have to proceed on the assumption that the seers who propounded the science of astrology knew more about it then we do. They found that with astronomical accuracy, symbolism also played a great part, and attributed equal importance to both. The Rasi Kundali is an astronomical chart and Navamsha Chakra is a symbolical chart. ----- , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Prafulla ji > > Do you think ,i am not using them in predictions.I have a good > collection of charts with me and i am fortunate to get new charts > very frequently.I am extensively studying with the help of > charts.You can see numerous quizzes in which i have participated > using amshas alone. > You can see the prediction given on Gordon Brown 2 years > back.Transit amshas,dasha all are given in this list and with God's > grace,it has come true.I have given many private predictions and > with the grace of GOD and the gurus who have guided me they have > come true.If i am not boasting them in front of you,it doesnt mean i > am not seeing charts. > > It is not at all a western concept regarding longitudinal > aspects.Pls read the views of Late Santhanam the very translator of > BPHS and the discussions that i had with shri PVR Rao. > > Please dont go with a concluded mind.Try to see if there is any > substance in what i am saying.For eg inspite of writing so many > mails ,Bhaskar ji is talking about Sun and Moon Lagnas and imaginary > lagnas etc. > > Is anyone prepared to read ans ubnderstand.Is sun lagna imaginary? > Moon lagna imgainary? > They are placements.Imaginary is the link between amsha and Rashi. > > If no body is prepared to read hard work and pramanas then there is > no use at all in these discussons. > > Shri K.N.Rao has told in this list many times that one who cannot > predict with rashi chakra can never learn astrology.Amshas as per me > will confirm the promises and help us in judging the grade of > yoga.Good and bad amshas of relevant bhava lords and corresponding > dashas will help us.Chara/sthira nature of amsha-rashi will help us. > nature of amsha lord will help us.The number of navamshas elapsed > will help us.In which bhava a planet is having navamsha will help us. > > Eg in my case,sun mercury conjunct as 9th and 10th lords in > rashi.But their amshas fall in the 10th and 9th houses of rashi > chakra respectively.Thus they have exchanged Rashis as far as amsha > sambandha is concerned.Sun is having amsha in 10th and mercury in > 9th. > > For me sun and mercury antaras brought good. > > So pls don't assume i am not checking charts.I get numerous personal > mails from list members and i try to reply back to the best of my > ability. > > Regds > Pradeep > -- In , Prafulla Gang <jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > Dear pradeep ji > > > > I am not getting into your interpretation. But am presenting you > another rationale. > > > > We all know the relevance of longitudinal reference in aspects > (well - western astrology has used it with more reference to its > degrees and longitudinal difference) and Vedic astrology has used > bhava / rashi ( I am not getting into D1 / D9 / D10 issue here) > based aspects (e.g. 4th / 8th bhava / rashi from mars as additional > aspects etc). > > > > But just plot them in degrees in chart..and go to D charts, and > see their mutual relations. Else, relevance of navapancham > relationship as most vital for any planet can not be derived. Just > explore it and may be we are sitting with different conclusion. But > you got to apply them in prediction..not in theory. > > > > regards / Prafulla Gang > > http://www.prafulla.net > > > > " Men who never get carried away should be. " > > ************************************************ > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep@ > > > Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:58:41 -0000 > > > > > > Re: Lagna Shadvargake Shloka - A Revisit > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > Rashi/Kshethra/Riksha/Bhavana are synonyms.Thus i would prefer to > > > take bhavas only from Rashi chakra.I have not seen any refrences > bout > > > house but amshas always. > > > > > > I can find the shashtyamsha of every bhava lord-similar to what > we > > > see with navamsha etc.It is not for any specific purpose like > > > marriage or children.Shubha shashtyamshas and dities have deeper > > > meaning.I feel you would agree that through Rashi chakra you can > see > > > anything and everything of a Jataka. > > > > > > If you may note i have mentioned that,you can represnt ehe > amshas as > > > we wish.How we interpret various relationships that a planet is > > > having on 12 rashis is that interests me.South inidans do both. > > > > > > Again if you note,i have clearly mentioned that you can see > bhavat > > > bhavam and any 30 degree sector can be a lagna.Even if you draw > them > > > a seperate charts,ther is no difference.I just said rashi > chakra -did > > > not say only from natal lagna.Not only hora or Ghatika,you can > take > > > from chandra/surya/arudha lagna navamsha,karakamsha lagna etc > from > > > rashi chakra.on the other hand dispositions seen from amsha > > > arrangement does not fall in linw with basic definitions.They are > > > amsha-rashi links.Thus shri Santhanam had raised concern. > > > > > > I have given many references like paparkshe which clearly means > > > rashi,but you have different opinion.It is ok with me.Rashige is > also > > > not acceptable.It is ok with me.Shri Rath has said amshaka has > to be > > > seen from rashi - i have seen clear demonstrations and > explanations > > > to students of the same.But yoo feel different.I have shown > > > references from BPHS that amshaka and amsha means the > same.Neither > > > shri Rath any of the students here was caring.They were all > > > negelecting classical references.It is ok for me. > > > You may think and arrive at whatever conclusions you may like.If > any > > > member reading this see any merit,i am thankful.If not,that is > ok too. > > > > > > Respect > > > Pradeep > > > , Chandrashekhar > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > >> > > >> Dear Pradeep, > > >> > > >> I think the way I read a classic is different from yours and > that > > > could > > >> be due to the generation gap. I have not understood how a > > > Shashtyamsha > > >> of a graha can tell everything about a jataka, as advised by > > > Parashara, > > >> not the akshavedamsha. If one has to understand everything > about a > > >> jataka one will have to analyze the bhavas and placement of > bhava > > > lords. > > >> So if one has to understand everything about a jataka one will > have > > > to > > >> look at the ShashtyaMsha chart or Akshavedamsha chart only. As > to > > > the > > >> occupation of a graha of a krura or shubha shastyamsha is > concerned > > > that > > >> refers to the bhava owned by that graha in the Rasi chart and > that > > > has > > >> nothing to do with the shashtyamsha or akshavedaamsha chart. The > > > reason > > >> is easier to understand if we see that if a graha that is a > malefic > > >> occupies the trishadaaya sthanas in the rasi chart it is said to > > > give > > >> good results so the results will not be bad for that sthana if > the > > > said > > >> graha occupies a malefic Shashtyamsha. At the same time the > bhava > > > owned > > >> by it could suffer as that would be a different rasi than the > > >> trishadaaya sthana occupied (unless the malefic is occupying own > > > rasi in > > >> such a sthana). > > >> > > >> By the way, I have seen too many south indian charts where > Navamsha > > >> placement of grahas in a chart to accept that South Indians only > > > write > > >> navamshas just outside the rasi chakra, as mentioned by you. > Even > > > Dr. > > >> Raman,s books do not show navamsha that way. > > >> > > >> As to rasi chakra being the only skeleton where rules like > bhavas > > > etc. > > >> can be used, could you give your comments on Parashara advising > to > > > draw > > >> Ghati, Bhava and Hora lagna chakra in the same manner as the > rasi > > >> chakra? Do you think he was wrong? > > >> > > >> Karakamsha is most certainly not the Rasi in which a graha has > > > amsha. It > > >> is the Navamsha occupied, in a rasi, by a planet that has > > > traversed the > > >> most number of Amshas in any rasi. > > >> > > >> The reason for the Raj yoga is obvious, the only point of > > > difference > > >> amongst scholars is whether the Lagnamsha is to be seen in rasi > > > chakra > > >> or navamsha chakra and same for the karakamsha. I can not take > > >> Karakamsha to mean rasi, unfortunately. As far as I know the > word > > > amsha > > >> without context is generally related to Navamsha or > Dwadashaamsha. > > > I > > >> have never seen it being used to indicate rasi. > > >> > > >> Take care, > > >> Chandrashekhar. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > >>> > > >>> As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know > > >>> that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects > and > > >>> other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi > chakra. > > >>> > > >>> I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a > > > piece > > >>> of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can > mention > > >>> navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used > to > > >>> do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in > > >>> corresponding rashis. > > >>> > > >>> There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet > > > falling > > >>> in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha > of > > > a > > >>> planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains > > > the > > >>> usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi > > > chakra. > > >>> > > >>> On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet > (not > > >>> shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used > > > for > > >>> assessing any purpose in general. > > >>> In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha > shashtyamshas > > > are > > >>> mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general > for > > > all > > >>> purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only > > > amshas > > >>> are used. > > >>> > > >>> Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from > > > which > > >>> one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as > > > they > > >>> are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern > raised by > > >>> Late santhanam. > > >>> On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points > can > > >>> change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora > > >>> Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same > > >>> skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts > but > > > it > > >>> makes no difference. > > >>> > > >>> Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the > > > rashi > > >>> on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi > > > on to > > >>> which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the > > >>> perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha > > >>> placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. > > >>> > > >>> If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the > > > strength > > >>> of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am > > > trying to > > >>> convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is > having > > >>> navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said > > > garaha in > > >>> delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or > joining > > >>> such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to > > > which > > >>> our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having > > > amsha > > >>> (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha > grahas - > > >>> Rajayoga results. > > >>> > > >>> I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he > takes > > > this > > >>> as a request. > > >>> > > >>> The other full shloka is > > >>> > > >>> Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe > > >>> Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama > > >>> > > >>> Now the gradation > > >>> Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha > > >>> Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam > > >>> > > >>> Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha > drishti. > > >>> > > >>> On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira > list or > > >>> so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having > identical > > >>> views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising > the > > >>> misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a > > > short > > >>> stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty > sure > > >>> that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get > swayed > > > so > > >>> easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good > lessons > > > for > > >>> me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my > mind > > > i > > >>> feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly > > > pardon. > > >>> > > >>> Respect > > >>> Pradeep > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > >>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Dear Pradeep, > > >>>> > > >>>> You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been > > > better > > >>> if you > > >>>> had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. > > >>>> > > >>>> I have only a small question. If there are no divisional > charts > > > to > > >>> be > > >>>> drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded > by > > >>>> Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of > grahas? > > >>>> > > >>>> I would also like your comments on how to > > >>> interpret " AkshavedaaMshake > > >>>> caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the > > >>> results > > >>>> related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no > > > charts > > >>> are > > >>>> to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe > > > shubhe > > >>>> vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato > raajaa > > >>> bhavati > > >>>> nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the > > >>> Karakamsha > > >>>> and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be > > >>> interpreted > > >>>> to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an > > > over > > >>>> fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk > about > > >>>> drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not > > > talk > > >>> about > > >>>> varying strengths of drishtis. > > >>>> > > >>>> I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the > > >>> shloka > > >>>> quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to > say. > > >>>> > > >>>> And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for > > > Ghati > > >>> lagna, > > >>>> Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So > the > > >>> theory > > >>>> being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be > > > drawn up > > >>> is > > >>>> not very correct, at least within the parameters of what > > > Parashara > > >>> said. > > >>>> The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM > ca > > >>>> lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me > > > tatra te > > >>>> sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Chandrashekhar. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Dear Respected members > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > > >>>>> following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna > > > Shadvargake > > >>>>> Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due > > > attention > > >>>>> and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the > > > six > > >>>>> divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it > > >>> constitutes > > >>>>> a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the > > > strength of > > >>>>> the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi > > > drishti > > >>>>> (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half > > > and > > >>>>> quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti > > > based on > > >>>>> houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no > > > grades > > >>> of > > >>>>> aspects. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > > >>>>> mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall > > > on > > >>>>> different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can > > >>> aspect > > >>>>> those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are > not > > >>>>> mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about > > >>> Vargas > > >>>>> and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not > > >>> translate > > >>>>> the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no > > > scope to > > >>>>> translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote > > > the > > >>>>> following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts > > > here. I > > >>>>> am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in > divisional > > >>>>> charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal > > > aspectual > > >>>>> evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further > > > on > > >>>>> this controversial aspect I leave > > >>>>> it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > > >>>>> referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just > his > > >>>>> asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - > > >>> pointing > > >>>>> to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were > > >>> trying > > >>>>> to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion > > > that > > >>>>> Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > > >>>>> fundamental definition from Parashara. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > > >>>>> yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But > > > why > > >>> did > > >>>>> contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as > > > vargas > > >>>>> too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all > > > fall > > >>>>> within the Rashi chakra. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating > > > his > > >>>>> greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in > > > aspects > > >>>>> in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > > >>>>> longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > > >>>>> Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can > > > happen. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > > >>>>> manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > > >>>>> mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different > > >>> story. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > > >>>>> Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas > interpreted > > >>>>> properly!! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand > > >>> these > > >>>>> in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back > > > to > > >>>>> Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back > to > > >>>>> rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per > > > them > > >>>>> in certain cases. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra > > > as > > >>>>> explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and > > >>> leave > > >>>>> it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls > > > as > > >>> all > > >>>>> of us are in the same path. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser > > > to > > >>> rub > > >>>>> out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did > > > is > > >>> not > > >>>>> necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > > >>>>> justice''. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > > >>>>> Pradeep > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ------------------------- > > >>> ------ > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release > > > Date: > > >>> 7/4/2007 1:40 PM > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 Dear Pradeep, I have never said that rasi/kshetra/ Riksha etc. are not synonyms. that is the shloka from Brihatjataka that you are referring to. I only pointed out the literal meaning of Rashi and pointed out that the word could also be meant for other indications. Since you think that Dashaadhyaayi is a standard text that is unparalleled in Jyotish classics and as it is a commentary on Brihatjataka, I will give you an example of how even within the astrological works two words can be used with different connotations. Varaha Mihira says, in Brihat jataka, that " Sva " is synonym for the 2nd bhava. yet else where it uses the same word " Sva " to indicate the own or Rasi identical by that owned by a graha and not the 2nd from it. So it is obvious that the definitions of a term given in a classic is not necessarily always indicative of one matter, in Sanskrit. Thus it is not necessary that paparkshe will always refer to 30 degree rasi division only. it could equally refer to a navamsha division owned by or ruled by a malefic. I am glad that you agree that there is no bar in casting charts from any reference point and with any division of a rasi. This is a good point to start from. If you take bhavas only from rasi charts then how do you apply rasi tulya navamsha or navamsha Tulya navamshas to charts? I can not comment on what Sanjay Rath has said, not knowing the entire context, but if I remember right he does advocate applying drishti in Divisional charts. So why only accept his advise selectively? I trust my point of view is clear now. Take care, Chandrashekhar. vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > Rashi/Kshethra/Riksha/Bhavana are synonyms.Thus i would prefer to > take bhavas only from Rashi chakra.I have not seen any refrences bout > house but amshas always. > > I can find the shashtyamsha of every bhava lord-similar to what we > see with navamsha etc.It is not for any specific purpose like > marriage or children.Shubha shashtyamshas and dities have deeper > meaning.I feel you would agree that through Rashi chakra you can see > anything and everything of a Jataka. > > If you may note i have mentioned that,you can represnt ehe amshas as > we wish.How we interpret various relationships that a planet is > having on 12 rashis is that interests me.South inidans do both. > > Again if you note,i have clearly mentioned that you can see bhavat > bhavam and any 30 degree sector can be a lagna.Even if you draw them > a seperate charts,ther is no difference.I just said rashi chakra -did > not say only from natal lagna.Not only hora or Ghatika,you can take > from chandra/surya/arudha lagna navamsha,karakamsha lagna etc from > rashi chakra.on the other hand dispositions seen from amsha > arrangement does not fall in linw with basic definitions.They are > amsha-rashi links.Thus shri Santhanam had raised concern. > > I have given many references like paparkshe which clearly means > rashi,but you have different opinion.It is ok with me.Rashige is also > not acceptable.It is ok with me.Shri Rath has said amshaka has to be > seen from rashi - i have seen clear demonstrations and explanations > to students of the same.But yoo feel different.I have shown > references from BPHS that amshaka and amsha means the same.Neither > shri Rath any of the students here was caring.They were all > negelecting classical references.It is ok for me. > You may think and arrive at whatever conclusions you may like.If any > member reading this see any merit,i am thankful.If not,that is ok too. > > Respect > Pradeep > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > <chandrashekhar46 wrote: > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > I think the way I read a classic is different from yours and that > could > > be due to the generation gap. I have not understood how a > Shashtyamsha > > of a graha can tell everything about a jataka, as advised by > Parashara, > > not the akshavedamsha. If one has to understand everything about a > > jataka one will have to analyze the bhavas and placement of bhava > lords. > > So if one has to understand everything about a jataka one will have > to > > look at the ShashtyaMsha chart or Akshavedamsha chart only. As to > the > > occupation of a graha of a krura or shubha shastyamsha is concerned > that > > refers to the bhava owned by that graha in the Rasi chart and that > has > > nothing to do with the shashtyamsha or akshavedaamsha chart. The > reason > > is easier to understand if we see that if a graha that is a malefic > > occupies the trishadaaya sthanas in the rasi chart it is said to > give > > good results so the results will not be bad for that sthana if the > said > > graha occupies a malefic Shashtyamsha. At the same time the bhava > owned > > by it could suffer as that would be a different rasi than the > > trishadaaya sthana occupied (unless the malefic is occupying own > rasi in > > such a sthana). > > > > By the way, I have seen too many south indian charts where Navamsha > > placement of grahas in a chart to accept that South Indians only > write > > navamshas just outside the rasi chakra, as mentioned by you. Even > Dr. > > Raman,s books do not show navamsha that way. > > > > As to rasi chakra being the only skeleton where rules like bhavas > etc. > > can be used, could you give your comments on Parashara advising to > draw > > Ghati, Bhava and Hora lagna chakra in the same manner as the rasi > > chakra? Do you think he was wrong? > > > > Karakamsha is most certainly not the Rasi in which a graha has > amsha. It > > is the Navamsha occupied, in a rasi, by a planet that has > traversed the > > most number of Amshas in any rasi. > > > > The reason for the Raj yoga is obvious, the only point of > difference > > amongst scholars is whether the Lagnamsha is to be seen in rasi > chakra > > or navamsha chakra and same for the karakamsha. I can not take > > Karakamsha to mean rasi, unfortunately. As far as I know the word > amsha > > without context is generally related to Navamsha or Dwadashaamsha. > I > > have never seen it being used to indicate rasi. > > > > Take care, > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know > > > that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects and > > > other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi chakra. > > > > > > I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a > piece > > > of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can mention > > > navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used to > > > do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in > > > corresponding rashis. > > > > > > There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet > falling > > > in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha of > a > > > planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains > the > > > usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi > chakra. > > > > > > On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet (not > > > shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used > for > > > assessing any purpose in general. > > > In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha shashtyamshas > are > > > mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general for > all > > > purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only > amshas > > > are used. > > > > > > Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from > which > > > one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as > they > > > are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern raised by > > > Late santhanam. > > > On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points can > > > change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora > > > Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same > > > skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts but > it > > > makes no difference. > > > > > > Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the > rashi > > > on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi > on to > > > which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the > > > perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha > > > placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. > > > > > > If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the > strength > > > of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am > trying to > > > convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is having > > > navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said > garaha in > > > delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or joining > > > such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to > which > > > our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having > amsha > > > (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha grahas - > > > Rajayoga results. > > > > > > I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he takes > this > > > as a request. > > > > > > The other full shloka is > > > > > > Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe > > > Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama > > > > > > Now the gradation > > > Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha > > > Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam > > > > > > Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha drishti. > > > > > > On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira list or > > > so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having identical > > > views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising the > > > misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a > short > > > stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty sure > > > that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get swayed > so > > > easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good lessons > for > > > me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my mind > i > > > feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly > pardon. > > > > > > Respect > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > <%40> > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep, > > > > > > > > You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been > better > > > if you > > > > had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. > > > > > > > > I have only a small question. If there are no divisional charts > to > > > be > > > > drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded by > > > > Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of grahas? > > > > > > > > I would also like your comments on how to > > > interpret " AkshavedaaMshake > > > > caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the > > > results > > > > related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no > charts > > > are > > > > to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe > shubhe > > > > vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato raajaa > > > bhavati > > > > nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the > > > Karakamsha > > > > and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be > > > interpreted > > > > to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an > over > > > > fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk about > > > > drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not > talk > > > about > > > > varying strengths of drishtis. > > > > > > > > I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the > > > shloka > > > > quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to say. > > > > > > > > And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for > Ghati > > > lagna, > > > > Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So the > > > theory > > > > being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be > drawn up > > > is > > > > not very correct, at least within the parameters of what > Parashara > > > said. > > > > The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM ca > > > > lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me > tatra te > > > > sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Respected members > > > > > > > > > > I would like to recall the attention of members again to the > > > > > following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna > Shadvargake > > > > > Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due > attention > > > > > and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. > > > > > > > > > > Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the > six > > > > > divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it > > > constitutes > > > > > a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the > strength of > > > > > the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi > drishti > > > > > (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half > and > > > > > quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti > based on > > > > > houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no > grades > > > of > > > > > aspects. > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is > > > > > mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall > on > > > > > different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can > > > aspect > > > > > those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are not > > > > > mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about > > > Vargas > > > > > and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. > > > > > > > > > > Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not > > > translate > > > > > the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no > scope to > > > > > translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote > the > > > > > following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts > here. I > > > > > am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional > > > > > charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal > aspectual > > > > > evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further > on > > > > > this controversial aspect I leave > > > > > it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are > > > > > referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just his > > > > > asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - > > > pointing > > > > > to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. > > > > > > > > > > I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were > > > trying > > > > > to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion > that > > > > > Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the > > > > > fundamental definition from Parashara. > > > > > > > > > > Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of > > > > > yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But > why > > > did > > > > > contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as > vargas > > > > > too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all > fall > > > > > within the Rashi chakra. > > > > > > > > > > But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating > his > > > > > greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in > aspects > > > > > in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the > > > > > longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. > > > > > Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can > happen. > > > > > > > > > > If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes > > > > > manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had > > > > > mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different > > > story. > > > > > > > > > > If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni > > > > > Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas interpreted > > > > > properly!! > > > > > > > > > > If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand > > > these > > > > > in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back > to > > > > > Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back to > > > > > rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per > them > > > > > in certain cases. > > > > > > > > > > In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra > as > > > > > explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. > > > > > > > > > > I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and > > > leave > > > > > it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. > > > > > > > > > > There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls > as > > > all > > > > > of us are in the same path. > > > > > > > > > > Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - > > > > > > > > > > ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser > to > > > rub > > > > > out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did > is > > > not > > > > > necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to > > > > > justice''. > > > > > > > > > > Kind Regds and thanks for your patience > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------- > > > ------ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release > Date: > > > 7/4/2007 1:40 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 Dear Pradeep ji I respect and appreciate your astro pursuits. and I am sure, for any principles - you must be testing them as well, understandably in your prediction model. I will revert impact on longitudinal reference in D9, useability of navamsa chakra etc - when we discuss your submission of your research through prediction model / case studies. I will write a seperate thread on Santhanam's use of Navamsha chakra - quite contrary to what you are proposing. regards / Prafulla Gang http://www.prafulla.net A little boost to the ego is undeniably exhilarating, but ask yourself if the initial excitement is worth the spiritual hangover. Remind yourself that real self-esteem is built on more substantial activities. In order to live free and happily - you must sacrifice boredom. It is not always an easy sacrifice. ************************************************ > > vijayadas_pradeep > Sun, 08 Jul 2007 08:07:17 -0000 > > Re: Lagna Shadvargake Shloka - A Revisit > > Dear Prafulla ji > > Do you think ,i am not using them in predictions.I have a good > collection of charts with me and i am fortunate to get new charts > very frequently.I am extensively studying with the help of > charts.You can see numerous quizzes in which i have participated > using amshas alone. > You can see the prediction given on Gordon Brown 2 years > back.Transit amshas,dasha all are given in this list and with God's > grace,it has come true.I have given many private predictions and > with the grace of GOD and the gurus who have guided me they have > come true.If i am not boasting them in front of you,it doesnt mean i > am not seeing charts. > > It is not at all a western concept regarding longitudinal > aspects.Pls read the views of Late Santhanam the very translator of > BPHS and the discussions that i had with shri PVR Rao. > > Please dont go with a concluded mind.Try to see if there is any > substance in what i am saying.For eg inspite of writing so many > mails ,Bhaskar ji is talking about Sun and Moon Lagnas and imaginary > lagnas etc. > > Is anyone prepared to read ans ubnderstand.Is sun lagna imaginary? > Moon lagna imgainary? > They are placements.Imaginary is the link between amsha and Rashi. > > If no body is prepared to read hard work and pramanas then there is > no use at all in these discussons. > > Shri K.N.Rao has told in this list many times that one who cannot > predict with rashi chakra can never learn astrology.Amshas as per me > will confirm the promises and help us in judging the grade of > yoga.Good and bad amshas of relevant bhava lords and corresponding > dashas will help us.Chara/sthira nature of amsha-rashi will help us. > nature of amsha lord will help us.The number of navamshas elapsed > will help us.In which bhava a planet is having navamsha will help us. > > Eg in my case,sun mercury conjunct as 9th and 10th lords in > rashi.But their amshas fall in the 10th and 9th houses of rashi > chakra respectively.Thus they have exchanged Rashis as far as amsha > sambandha is concerned.Sun is having amsha in 10th and mercury in > 9th. > > For me sun and mercury antaras brought good. > > So pls don't assume i am not checking charts.I get numerous personal > mails from list members and i try to reply back to the best of my > ability. > > Regds > Pradeep > -- In , Prafulla Gang <jyotish > wrote: >> >> Dear pradeep ji >> >> I am not getting into your interpretation. But am presenting you > another rationale. >> >> We all know the relevance of longitudinal reference in aspects > (well - western astrology has used it with more reference to its > degrees and longitudinal difference) and Vedic astrology has used > bhava / rashi ( I am not getting into D1 / D9 / D10 issue here) > based aspects (e.g. 4th / 8th bhava / rashi from mars as additional > aspects etc). >> >> But just plot them in degrees in chart..and go to D charts, and > see their mutual relations. Else, relevance of navapancham > relationship as most vital for any planet can not be derived. Just > explore it and may be we are sitting with different conclusion. But > you got to apply them in prediction..not in theory. >> >> regards / Prafulla Gang >> http://www.prafulla.net >> >> " Men who never get carried away should be. " >> ************************************************ >> >> >>> >>> vijayadas_pradeep >>> Sat, 07 Jul 2007 15:58:41 -0000 >>> >>> Re: Lagna Shadvargake Shloka - A Revisit >>> >>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji >>> >>> Rashi/Kshethra/Riksha/Bhavana are synonyms.Thus i would prefer to >>> take bhavas only from Rashi chakra.I have not seen any refrences > bout >>> house but amshas always. >>> >>> I can find the shashtyamsha of every bhava lord-similar to what > we >>> see with navamsha etc.It is not for any specific purpose like >>> marriage or children.Shubha shashtyamshas and dities have deeper >>> meaning.I feel you would agree that through Rashi chakra you can > see >>> anything and everything of a Jataka. >>> >>> If you may note i have mentioned that,you can represnt ehe > amshas as >>> we wish.How we interpret various relationships that a planet is >>> having on 12 rashis is that interests me.South inidans do both. >>> >>> Again if you note,i have clearly mentioned that you can see > bhavat >>> bhavam and any 30 degree sector can be a lagna.Even if you draw > them >>> a seperate charts,ther is no difference.I just said rashi > chakra -did >>> not say only from natal lagna.Not only hora or Ghatika,you can > take >>> from chandra/surya/arudha lagna navamsha,karakamsha lagna etc > from >>> rashi chakra.on the other hand dispositions seen from amsha >>> arrangement does not fall in linw with basic definitions.They are >>> amsha-rashi links.Thus shri Santhanam had raised concern. >>> >>> I have given many references like paparkshe which clearly means >>> rashi,but you have different opinion.It is ok with me.Rashige is > also >>> not acceptable.It is ok with me.Shri Rath has said amshaka has > to be >>> seen from rashi - i have seen clear demonstrations and > explanations >>> to students of the same.But yoo feel different.I have shown >>> references from BPHS that amshaka and amsha means the > same.Neither >>> shri Rath any of the students here was caring.They were all >>> negelecting classical references.It is ok for me. >>> You may think and arrive at whatever conclusions you may like.If > any >>> member reading this see any merit,i am thankful.If not,that is > ok too. >>> >>> Respect >>> Pradeep >>> , Chandrashekhar >>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Pradeep, >>>> >>>> I think the way I read a classic is different from yours and > that >>> could >>>> be due to the generation gap. I have not understood how a >>> Shashtyamsha >>>> of a graha can tell everything about a jataka, as advised by >>> Parashara, >>>> not the akshavedamsha. If one has to understand everything > about a >>>> jataka one will have to analyze the bhavas and placement of > bhava >>> lords. >>>> So if one has to understand everything about a jataka one will > have >>> to >>>> look at the ShashtyaMsha chart or Akshavedamsha chart only. As > to >>> the >>>> occupation of a graha of a krura or shubha shastyamsha is > concerned >>> that >>>> refers to the bhava owned by that graha in the Rasi chart and > that >>> has >>>> nothing to do with the shashtyamsha or akshavedaamsha chart. The >>> reason >>>> is easier to understand if we see that if a graha that is a > malefic >>>> occupies the trishadaaya sthanas in the rasi chart it is said to >>> give >>>> good results so the results will not be bad for that sthana if > the >>> said >>>> graha occupies a malefic Shashtyamsha. At the same time the > bhava >>> owned >>>> by it could suffer as that would be a different rasi than the >>>> trishadaaya sthana occupied (unless the malefic is occupying own >>> rasi in >>>> such a sthana). >>>> >>>> By the way, I have seen too many south indian charts where > Navamsha >>>> placement of grahas in a chart to accept that South Indians only >>> write >>>> navamshas just outside the rasi chakra, as mentioned by you. > Even >>> Dr. >>>> Raman,s books do not show navamsha that way. >>>> >>>> As to rasi chakra being the only skeleton where rules like > bhavas >>> etc. >>>> can be used, could you give your comments on Parashara advising > to >>> draw >>>> Ghati, Bhava and Hora lagna chakra in the same manner as the > rasi >>>> chakra? Do you think he was wrong? >>>> >>>> Karakamsha is most certainly not the Rasi in which a graha has >>> amsha. It >>>> is the Navamsha occupied, in a rasi, by a planet that has >>> traversed the >>>> most number of Amshas in any rasi. >>>> >>>> The reason for the Raj yoga is obvious, the only point of >>> difference >>>> amongst scholars is whether the Lagnamsha is to be seen in rasi >>> chakra >>>> or navamsha chakra and same for the karakamsha. I can not take >>>> Karakamsha to mean rasi, unfortunately. As far as I know the > word >>> amsha >>>> without context is generally related to Navamsha or > Dwadashaamsha. >>> I >>>> have never seen it being used to indicate rasi. >>>> >>>> Take care, >>>> Chandrashekhar. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear Chandrashekhar ji >>>>> >>>>> As you have understood my views in the past as well,you know >>>>> that ''chart '' is opposed so that people do not take aspects > and >>>>> other rules which are mentioned w.r to Rashis within Rashi > chakra. >>>>> >>>>> I have mentioned in the past too that,you can either write on a >>> piece >>>>> of paper ,or you can draw as a seperate diagram Or you can > mention >>>>> navamshas just outside the rashi chakra as south indians used > to >>>>> do.Key is one should be able to place the derived amshas in >>>>> corresponding rashis. >>>>> >>>>> There are shlokas requesting us to see navamsha of a planet >>> falling >>>>> in the 7th bhava for spouse matters.Also one can see saptamsha > of >>> a >>>>> planet falling in the 5th bhava for child matters.This explains >>> the >>>>> usage of particular vargas by relating them to bhavas in Rashi >>> chakra. >>>>> >>>>> On the other hand akshavedamsha and shastyamsha of a planet > (not >>>>> shastyamsha chart) is not for a specific matter and can be used >>> for >>>>> assessing any purpose in general. >>>>> In BPHS for eg planets falling in Krura and Shubha > shashtyamshas >>> are >>>>> mentioned for destruction or flourishment of yogas(In general > for >>> all >>>>> purposes).If you look at this chapter ,you can find that only >>> amshas >>>>> are used. >>>>> >>>>> Rashi chakra is the only chart skeleton that is possible from >>> which >>>>> one can use the rules such as aspects and bhavas.This is so,as >>> they >>>>> are defined w.r to such dispositions.Pls see the concern > raised by >>>>> Late santhanam. >>>>> On the other hand similar to bhavat bhavam,the refernce points > can >>>>> change.Lagna can be any 30 degree sector.Chandra Lagna/Hora >>>>> Lagna/Arudha Lagna/Ghatika Lagna etc can be seen from the same >>>>> skeleton.Thus if we want we can draw them as seperate charts > but >>> it >>>>> makes no difference. >>>>> >>>>> Similarly ,as discussed in our previous mails-Karakamsha is the >>> rashi >>>>> on to which Karaka graha is having amsha.Lagnamsha is the Rashi >>> on to >>>>> which Lagna is having Navamsha.Lagna shadvargake shloka is the >>>>> perfect example to understand this.Thus we have to see graha >>>>> placements and aspects on the said rashis to see Rajayoga. >>>>> >>>>> If you can recollect some shlokas which asks us to see the >>> strength >>>>> of the navamsha lord of graha -you may understand what i am >>> trying to >>>>> convey in a better fashion.The Rashi on to which a graha is > having >>>>> navamsha, has got a role to play on the ability of the said >>> garaha in >>>>> delivering results.Thus if shubha grahas are aspecting or > joining >>>>> such rashis -results will be good.Therefore if the Rashi on to >>> which >>>>> our natal lagna is having amsha(Lagnamsha) and our AK is having >>> amsha >>>>> (Swamsha or Karakamsha) is joined or aspected by Shubha > grahas - >>>>> Rajayoga results. >>>>> >>>>> I would also be happy if shri Narasimha may join.I hope he > takes >>> this >>>>> as a request. >>>>> >>>>> The other full shloka is >>>>> >>>>> Lagna shadvargake cha evam eka kheta yutekshithe >>>>> Rajayogo bhavatyeva nirvishankam dwijottama >>>>> >>>>> Now the gradation >>>>> Poorna drishte Poorna yogam ardha drishte ardhameva cha >>>>> Pada drishte padayogamiti jneyam kramat phalam >>>>> >>>>> Thus as shri Narasimha has said it is pointing to Graha > drishti. >>>>> >>>>> On a personal note ,i have found recently in Varaha Mihira > list or >>>>> so,your views on Vargas.This post made in 2002,is having > identical >>>>> views to mine.I could find that you were strongly criticising > the >>>>> misuse and misrepresentation of Varga charts.Thus i assume ,a >>> short >>>>> stint at SJC can be a reason for your leaning.But i am pretty > sure >>>>> that you have your own views,very logical, and do not get > swayed >>> so >>>>> easily.The way you interpret charts were always been good > lessons >>> for >>>>> me. Thus my assumption may not be true.Still somewhere in my > mind >>> i >>>>> feel your short stint has left some influence.If not kindly >>> pardon. >>>>> >>>>> Respect >>>>> Pradeep >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> <%40>, Chandrashekhar >>>>> <chandrashekhar46@> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear Pradeep, >>>>>> >>>>>> You present an argument well, no doubt. It would have been >>> better >>>>> if you >>>>>> had quoted the " Lagne shadvargake " shloka that you refer to. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have only a small question. If there are no divisional > charts >>> to >>>>> be >>>>>> drawn, as propounded by you or as you assume to be propounded > by >>>>>> Parashara, where do you see the aspects or occupation of > grahas? >>>>>> >>>>>> I would also like your comments on how to >>>>> interpret " AkshavedaaMshake >>>>>> caiva SaSTyaMshe.a khilamIkshayet " . How do you look at all the >>>>> results >>>>>> related to a jataka from Akshavedamsha and SaStyaMsha if no >>> charts >>>>> are >>>>>> to be drawn? There are many other shlokas like " KaarakaaMshe >>> shubhe >>>>>> vipra lagnaaMshe ca shubhagrahe. shubhasaMvIkshIte jaato > raajaa >>>>> bhavati >>>>>> nishcitaH " and so on that talk about benefics occupying the >>>>> Karakamsha >>>>>> and Lagnamsha being aspected by benefics, which can not be >>>>> interpreted >>>>>> to mean that they refer to rasis unless of course one has an >>> over >>>>>> fertile imagination, that indicate that Parashara did talk > about >>>>>> drishtis in navamsha charts for certain raj yogas that do not >>> talk >>>>> about >>>>>> varying strengths of drishtis. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would be obliged if you can get Narasimha's reactions on the >>>>> shloka >>>>>> quoted above. it would be interesting to see what he has to > say. >>>>>> >>>>>> And by the way Parashara also advises to draw up charts for >>> Ghati >>>>> lagna, >>>>>> Bhava Lagna and Hora Lagna without any ambiguity at all. So > the >>>>> theory >>>>>> being advanced, that no chart other than Rasi chart can be >>> drawn up >>>>> is >>>>>> not very correct, at least within the parameters of what >>> Parashara >>>>> said. >>>>>> The shloka that appears in BPHS, for record, is " kramaadeSaaM > ca >>>>>> lagnaanaaM bhavakoSThaM prithak likhet. ye grahaa yatra me >>> tatra te >>>>>> sthaapyaa raashilagnavat " . >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Chandrashekhar. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> vijayadas_pradeep wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Respected members >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would like to recall the attention of members again to the >>>>>>> following mail from shri PVR Narasimha Rao - on Lagna >>> Shadvargake >>>>>>> Shloka.I request everyone to kindly read this with due >>> attention >>>>>>> and care as this may help us in solving most of our doubts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Shri Narasimha:----This verse means that if lagna in all the >>> six >>>>>>> divisions is occupied or aspected by the same planet, it >>>>> constitutes >>>>>>> a raja yoga. Based on the fullness of the aspect, the >>> strength of >>>>>>> the yoga is to be decided. One can argue that this is rasi >>> drishti >>>>>>> (which does not need houses), but the mention of full, half >>> and >>>>>>> quarter aspects makes it quite obvious that graha drishti >>> based on >>>>>>> houses is being referred to. In rasi drishti, there are no >>> grades >>>>> of >>>>>>> aspects. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pradeep: -Shri Narasimha Rao is absolutely right as Sage is >>>>>>> mentioning about Graha drishti.Shadvargas of Lagna will fall >>> on >>>>>>> different Rashis within Rashi chakra and Graha placements can >>>>> aspect >>>>>>> those Rashis.The moment you add words or thought which are > not >>>>>>> mentioned in the shloka- Chaos results.Sage is talking about >>>>> Vargas >>>>>>> and who asked us to bring in ''Varga Charts'' is my doubt. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Shri Narasimha:As a matter of fact, Sri Santhanam did not >>>>> translate >>>>>>> the verse any differently than I would. In fact, I see no >>> scope to >>>>>>> translate differently. Under his notes, Sri Santhanam wrote >>> the >>>>>>> following:Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts >>> here. I >>>>>>> am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in > divisional >>>>>>> charts for the sage himself referred to the longitudinal >>> aspectual >>>>>>> evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further >>> on >>>>>>> this controversial aspect I leave >>>>>>> it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully. " >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pradeep:Please see - Shri Santhanam is saying - ''Aspects are >>>>>>> referred to in the divisional charts here'' -which is just > his >>>>>>> asuumption - Sage is only talking about Lagna Shadvargake - >>>>> pointing >>>>>>> to ShadVARGAS of Lagna - No chart at all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I had clearly mentioned yesterday that many scholars who were >>>>> trying >>>>>>> to interpret these shlokas, went with a preconcluded notion >>> that >>>>>>> Vargas are Full Charts.Which is not so and is against the >>>>>>> fundamental definition from Parashara. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Classical examples and explanations from elderly scholars of >>>>>>> yesteryears(many years back) go by parasharas defintion.But >>> why >>>>> did >>>>>>> contemporary scholars have such an assumption? -Probably as >>> vargas >>>>>>> too were drwan inside Rashi skeletons!!.Yes ofcourse they all >>> fall >>>>>>> within the Rashi chakra. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But you may see -Shri Santhanam honestly says -Demonstrating >>> his >>>>>>> greatness - ''I am unable to fully conceive the logic in >>> aspects >>>>>>> in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to the >>>>>>> longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter''. >>>>>>> Absolutely right - Sage has defined on where an aspect can >>> happen. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If shri Santhanam had the fortune to see the manuscripts(yes >>>>>>> manuscripts in Thaliyola or leaf are present) which i had >>>>>>> mentioned,then translation of BPHS would had been a different >>>>> story. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If we violate definiton of Vargas as mentioned by Mahamuni >>>>>>> Parashara - can we still expect to get the shlokas > interpreted >>>>>>> properly!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you may note contemporary scholars were able to understand >>>>> these >>>>>>> in certain case.Shri Rath understood that amshaka roots back >>> to >>>>>>> Rashis.Shri K.N.Raoji understood that Karakamsha roots back > to >>>>>>> rashi.thus you see amsha as well as amshaka roots back as per >>> them >>>>>>> in certain cases. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In Reality they all relate back and fall within Rashi chakra >>> as >>>>>>> explained by great grand fathers of Jyotish parampara. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have tried my level best within my limited intelligence and >>>>> leave >>>>>>> it at the discretion of jyotish enthusiasts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no disrespect at all towards any of the great souls >>> as >>>>> all >>>>>>> of us are in the same path. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let us analyze what Paulo coelho wrote about pencil - >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ''Third quality: the pencil always allows us to use an eraser >>> to >>>>> rub >>>>>>> out any mistakes. This means that correcting something we did >>> is >>>>> not >>>>>>> necessarily a bad thing; it helps to keep us on the road to >>>>>>> justice''. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kind Regds and thanks for your patience >>>>>>> Pradeep >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------- >>>>> ------ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.10.0/886 - Release >>> Date: >>>>> 7/4/2007 1:40 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.