Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 One more proof by Shri KN Rao of aspects being used in Divisional Charts- It is really funny. One should be well read to enter into debates and discussions. Only few are well read here who may not be entirely present in this debate., but come for short intervals or do not come at all. Unfortunatly I am not finding the right candidate with whom I can really enjoy debating.No spark. Only one sided game is being played here. There is no simple, ample or even sample proof coming from any, trying to defend their misplaced theories. they are just talking on mundane matters. Anyway heres one more reference- Book named - " Succesful Predictive Techniques of Hindu Astrology " by KN Rao. Page 76 - ---- But Saturn is placed in the 3rd in the birth horoscope and also not merely in the 3rd in dwadamsha but with ketu and is aspected by Mars from the 12th House------- ( The Dwadamsha Chart is given on the above page and one may see this aspect in the Divisional Chart) Now hope no one calls this proof too, as a joke, myth or Bhrama, mithya or Untruth. regards, bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Dear Bhaskar ji, There are huge references in writings of Shri KN Rao , Late Shri BV Raman, Shri CS Patel, Shri Sanjay Rath, Shri VK Choudhry, Late Santhanam to explain: a. there are D charts (contrary to Shri Pradeep's contention) b. D charts are interpreted as Rasi charts with houses / combinations / aspects etc Yes - Navamsa dispositor / mapping to D1 lagna is also one of the method of Navamsa interpretation - but not the exhaustive method 9as contested by Shri Pradeep). Shri pradeep is talking about d9 only - what about other D charts - like d10, d81, d60 and so on? How does someone read those D charts? Selective references of any book can never be conclusive proof of conformity - when Shri Pradeep is rejecting the very basis and interpretation of mentioned writers. Jyotish students must see the interpretation model of the above mentioned authors and make their judgment - if these astrologers go by Shri Pradeep's model. There may be difference of opinion amongst all or any of them - for interpretation of the jyotish principles; but on D charts - there have never been any contradictions amongst them. So - to prove them wrong - may be an early conclusion - without application on blind charts. Shri Pradeep referred to " likely " partial aspects of Kalyan Varma's reference - where he quoted aspects of sun and mercury; sun and venus; venus and mercury. Can he show the application of partial aspects? I have not yet seen any astrologer applying partial aspects as event indicator candidate. Reproducing theories and shloka can be a good premise to start - at some stage, they must be seen working? I will be happy - if someone can demonstrate partial aspects - when sun is in libra and mercury is in virgo. and How they are used for interpretation. Kalyan Varma was clear on aspects in D9. i do not think, at so many places - he was giving shlokas based upon partial aspects. This is endless debate with just repetitions of contentions. I will appreciate if selective or misleading references are avoided in the course of argument. I have full respect for the interpretation - Shri pradeep might have. Since I do not know sanskrit, I am not competent to comment on his translation. There is no question of truth or untruth; correct or incorrect - but can all the above names be grossly wrong. Are we inferring that - they did not do their homework properly !! regards / Prafulla , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > One more proof by Shri KN Rao > of aspects being used in Divisional Charts- > > It is really funny. One should be well > read to enter into debates and > discussions. Only few are well read here > who may not be entirely present in this > debate., but come for short intervals > or do not come at all. > > Unfortunatly I am not finding > the right candidate with whom I can really > enjoy debating.No spark. Only one sided > game is being played here. There is no simple, > ample or even sample proof coming from any, > trying to defend their misplaced theories. > they are just talking on mundane matters. > > Anyway heres one more reference- > > Book named - > " Succesful Predictive Techniques of > Hindu Astrology " by KN Rao. > > Page 76 - > ---- But Saturn is placed in the 3rd in the birth horoscope > and also not merely in the 3rd in dwadamsha but with ketu > and is aspected by Mars from the 12th House------- > > ( The Dwadamsha Chart is given on the above page and > one may see this aspect in the Divisional Chart) > > Now hope no one calls this proof too, as a joke, myth or > Bhrama, mithya or Untruth. > > regards, > bhaskar. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Dear Sri Bhaskar, You realized something I realized long time ago. That is why I am really not interested to participate. I do not understand what these one-sided argument astrologers are thinking. It is the same reason that Sri PVR Narasimha Rao left at the same stage, which youd would realize if you have read the past threads from archive. Just like Sri Pradeep was quoting as if he is master of all the classics (for a moment let us accept the same); when he talks about Sri KN Rao, he should read ALL PUBLICATIONS, ARTCILES AND BOOKS published by Sri KN Rao uptil now and then talk about what he uses and what he does not use to make predictions. Here the books published by Sri KN Rao are THE PRAMAANA; there is no question about it. Through his books he is talking to rest of us, as it is not humanly possible to communicate his views on a one-on-one basis. Prima Faci, we have to accept his books as PRAMAANA. It is a mere waste of time. Did you not notice, that Sri Pradeep is conveniently avoiding your questions posed in the past couple of mails? He talks about those classics, as pramana, for which there is not proof that they are the original classics, say BPHS itself. But he refuses Sri KN Rao's books as PRAMAANA for the views of Sri Rao himself. This is absolutely ridiculous. In every book of his, Sri Rao made extensive use of amsa charts; there is no question about it. If the thought of 'Making us accept his opinion' is removed from his mind, the debate would be entirely different. Best regards, Satya Sai Kolachina , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > One more proof by Shri KN Rao > of aspects being used in Divisional Charts- > > It is really funny. One should be well > read to enter into debates and > discussions. Only few are well read here > who may not be entirely present in this > debate., but come for short intervals > or do not come at all. > > Unfortunatly I am not finding > the right candidate with whom I can really > enjoy debating.No spark. Only one sided > game is being played here. There is no simple, > ample or even sample proof coming from any, > trying to defend their misplaced theories. > they are just talking on mundane matters. > > Anyway heres one more reference- > > Book named - > " Succesful Predictive Techniques of > Hindu Astrology " by KN Rao. > > Page 76 - > ---- But Saturn is placed in the 3rd in the birth horoscope > and also not merely in the 3rd in dwadamsha but with ketu > and is aspected by Mars from the 12th House------- > > ( The Dwadamsha Chart is given on the above page and > one may see this aspect in the Divisional Chart) > > Now hope no one calls this proof too, as a joke, myth or > Bhrama, mithya or Untruth. > > regards, > bhaskar. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Dear Sri Satya Sai ji, I too had realized this long back and wished to quit, but then my name kept coming up, and some mails were addressd to me, so I had to come back though reluctantly. I realize too well, that many of my questions in my previous mails have been unanswered by many, but since I respect all beings of God, specially harmless astrologers, and more specially those into research work of the ancient texts, I never had the remotest desire to humble anyone, or make them loose their respect, so I never remind anyone of the questions, and neither talk of these in my subsequent mails. My motto is Live and let Live, do not force oneself on anyone. if cannot make somes life better, then not spoil it, and spread Love and happiness. I am not looking for any small victories in such threads, but to learn, and remove the shreds of ignorance if any , in my own self or others if they persist to force upon me, in their clouded theories, which they are most welcome to persue. regards, Bhaskar. , " Satya Sai Kolachina " <skolachi wrote: > > Dear Sri Bhaskar, > > You realized something I realized long time ago. That is why I am > really not interested to participate. I do not understand what these > one-sided argument astrologers are thinking. It is the same reason > that Sri PVR Narasimha Rao left at the same stage, which youd would > realize if you have read the past threads from archive. > > Just like Sri Pradeep was quoting as if he is master of all the > classics (for a moment let us accept the same); when he talks about > Sri KN Rao, he should read ALL PUBLICATIONS, ARTCILES AND BOOKS > published by Sri KN Rao uptil now and then talk about what he uses > and what he does not use to make predictions. Here the books > published by Sri KN Rao are THE PRAMAANA; there is no question about > it. Through his books he is talking to rest of us, as it is not > humanly possible to communicate his views on a one-on-one basis. > Prima Faci, we have to accept his books as PRAMAANA. > > It is a mere waste of time. Did you not notice, that Sri Pradeep is > conveniently avoiding your questions posed in the past couple of > mails? > > He talks about those classics, as pramana, for which there is not > proof that they are the original classics, say BPHS itself. But he > refuses Sri KN Rao's books as PRAMAANA for the views of Sri Rao > himself. This is absolutely ridiculous. In every book of his, Sri Rao > made extensive use of amsa charts; there is no question about it. > > If the thought of 'Making us accept his opinion' is removed from his > mind, the debate would be entirely different. > > Best regards, > Satya Sai Kolachina > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > One more proof by Shri KN Rao > > of aspects being used in Divisional Charts- > > > > It is really funny. One should be well > > read to enter into debates and > > discussions. Only few are well read here > > who may not be entirely present in this > > debate., but come for short intervals > > or do not come at all. > > > > Unfortunatly I am not finding > > the right candidate with whom I can really > > enjoy debating.No spark. Only one sided > > game is being played here. There is no simple, > > ample or even sample proof coming from any, > > trying to defend their misplaced theories. > > they are just talking on mundane matters. > > > > Anyway heres one more reference- > > > > Book named - > > " Succesful Predictive Techniques of > > Hindu Astrology " by KN Rao. > > > > Page 76 - > > ---- But Saturn is placed in the 3rd in the birth horoscope > > and also not merely in the 3rd in dwadamsha but with ketu > > and is aspected by Mars from the 12th House------- > > > > ( The Dwadamsha Chart is given on the above page and > > one may see this aspect in the Divisional Chart) > > > > Now hope no one calls this proof too, as a joke, myth or > > Bhrama, mithya or Untruth. > > > > regards, > > bhaskar. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Dear Satya ji, I agree with you. You have said the complete thing upto the real point. Warm Regards, Tarun , " Satya Sai Kolachina " <skolachi wrote: > > Dear Sri Bhaskar, > > You realized something I realized long time ago. That is why I am > really not interested to participate. I do not understand what these > one-sided argument astrologers are thinking. It is the same reason > that Sri PVR Narasimha Rao left at the same stage, which youd would > realize if you have read the past threads from archive. > > Just like Sri Pradeep was quoting as if he is master of all the > classics (for a moment let us accept the same); when he talks about > Sri KN Rao, he should read ALL PUBLICATIONS, ARTCILES AND BOOKS > published by Sri KN Rao uptil now and then talk about what he uses > and what he does not use to make predictions. Here the books > published by Sri KN Rao are THE PRAMAANA; there is no question about > it. Through his books he is talking to rest of us, as it is not > humanly possible to communicate his views on a one-on-one basis. > Prima Faci, we have to accept his books as PRAMAANA. > > It is a mere waste of time. Did you not notice, that Sri Pradeep is > conveniently avoiding your questions posed in the past couple of > mails? > > He talks about those classics, as pramana, for which there is not > proof that they are the original classics, say BPHS itself. But he > refuses Sri KN Rao's books as PRAMAANA for the views of Sri Rao > himself. This is absolutely ridiculous. In every book of his, Sri Rao > made extensive use of amsa charts; there is no question about it. > > If the thought of 'Making us accept his opinion' is removed from his > mind, the debate would be entirely different. > > Best regards, > Satya Sai Kolachina > > > , " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish@> > wrote: > > > > One more proof by Shri KN Rao > > of aspects being used in Divisional Charts- > > > > It is really funny. One should be well > > read to enter into debates and > > discussions. Only few are well read here > > who may not be entirely present in this > > debate., but come for short intervals > > or do not come at all. > > > > Unfortunatly I am not finding > > the right candidate with whom I can really > > enjoy debating.No spark. Only one sided > > game is being played here. There is no simple, > > ample or even sample proof coming from any, > > trying to defend their misplaced theories. > > they are just talking on mundane matters. > > > > Anyway heres one more reference- > > > > Book named - > > " Succesful Predictive Techniques of > > Hindu Astrology " by KN Rao. > > > > Page 76 - > > ---- But Saturn is placed in the 3rd in the birth horoscope > > and also not merely in the 3rd in dwadamsha but with ketu > > and is aspected by Mars from the 12th House------- > > > > ( The Dwadamsha Chart is given on the above page and > > one may see this aspect in the Divisional Chart) > > > > Now hope no one calls this proof too, as a joke, myth or > > Bhrama, mithya or Untruth. > > > > regards, > > bhaskar. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 He, He, He! Bhaskar <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: One more proof by Shri KN Rao of aspects being used in Divisional Charts- It is really funny. One should be well read to enter into debates and discussions. Only few are well read here who may not be entirely present in this debate., but come for short intervals or do not come at all. Unfortunatly I am not finding the right candidate with whom I can really enjoy debating.No spark. Only one sided game is being played here. There is no simple, ample or even sample proof coming from any, trying to defend their misplaced theories. they are just talking on mundane matters. Anyway heres one more reference- Book named - " Succesful Predictive Techniques of Hindu Astrology " by KN Rao. Page 76 - ---- But Saturn is placed in the 3rd in the birth horoscope and also not merely in the 3rd in dwadamsha but with ketu and is aspected by Mars from the 12th House------- ( The Dwadamsha Chart is given on the above page and one may see this aspect in the Divisional Chart) Now hope no one calls this proof too, as a joke, myth or Bhrama, mithya or Untruth. regards, bhaskar. Building a website is a piece of cake. Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. 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.