Contradictions -Brilliant Point Satish ji

[Guest guest]

Dear Satish ji

 

This is the perfect point.

 

For me Karakamsha is the amsha of Karaka Graha Bindu.Lagnamsha is

the amsha of Lagan bindu.

 

Why is Raoji taking karaka graha alone back to Rashi.Those

interested may ask for the reason.Those who are objective will not

ignore this point.I have more respect for Raoji than anyone here is

assuming as.I do not have to express that respect in front of

everyone.It is just in front of my conscience.I cannot support Raoji

cheating my conscience.I will never do that in Jyotish.I can also

tell Raoji -Raoji yes aspects can be seen.You are wonderful.That is

not my style of respect.

 

 

Why is Raoji considering Swamsha as a full chart ,when the

subsequent shlokas cannot be interpreted.If Raoji has an

intepretation ,then pardon me and i would be eager to learn that.

 

Regds

Pradeep

, SPK <aquaris_rising wrote:

>

> Dear Satyaji,

>

> Yes I agree he uses D-charts. I still do not

> understand then why move karakamsha back to rashi ? Do

> you see the diachotomy here? If one can use D-9 as a

> chrt whats the need to move karakamsha which is

> navansha of AK back to rashi. Why ?

>

> Satish

> --- Satya Sai Kolachina <skolachi wrote:

>

> > Dear Sri Satish,

> >

> > For your information, Sri KN Rao uses aspects,

> > bhavas and houses in

> > amsa charts extensively, even today. It is evident

> > from his articles

> > published a few days ago, which I gave reference in

> > this list

> > earlier. From my understanding he doesn't adopt the

> > classics AS IS;

> > since he several times insisted, the CRF approach;

> > time and again he

> > says - take a classical principle, apply it on

> > hundreds if not

> > thousands of horoscopes and use it with confidence.

> > I am just

> > reiterating which I mentioned earlier; this is not

> > something he told

> > 15 yrs ago and stopped practicing today. Even

> > today's articles from

> > him also speak the same way. I am not his spokesman;

> > but I have read

> > almost all of his publications (nearly 90% or more

> > his

> > publiscations).

> >

> > With respect to great astrologers like him and Dr

> > Raman, we SHOULD

> > TAKE THEIR BOOKS AS PRAMAANAS. They do not change

> > their words

> > according to convenience; rather, they say it only

> > when they are

> > confident, after thorough research.

> >

> > Best regards,

> > Satya Sai Kolachina

> >

> >

> > , SPK

> > <aquaris_rising@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Vijaydas ji and all,

> > >

> > > It did not surprise me that my mail from yesterday

> > > made evryone rise in defense of all the past

> > masters.

> > > The intent was not to belittle their

> > contributions.

> > > They are great scholars and have made significant

> > > contributions to jyotish. But only the weight of

> > > evidence is acceptable in scientific enquiry.

> > >

> > > Vijaydas has raised the points and the

> > contradictions

> > > in the writing of these masters. Only they can

> > answer

> > > what they truly beleive. Peoples understanding

> > chages

> > > over time. Please ask yourself

> > >

> > > 1. KN Rao uses aspects and houses in divisions and

> > > uses them as charts and many have given examples

> > from

> > > his books. Then please ask yourself why does he

> > move

> > > karakamsha back to rashi ? Is it because he did

> > not

> > > beleive in D-charts then but beleives in them now

> > ? I

> > > see a contradiction. May be as he eveolved in this

> > > field he may have come to different

> > understandings.

> > > Thats why I said only he can answer this question

> > NOT

> > > his books as some are written 15 years back and

> > some

> > > more recently. Are we so confident without talking

> > to

> > > him that his understanding has remained static for

> > > past 15 years ?

> > >

> > > 2. Santhanam, as some have pointed out used

> > opposition

> > > etc. in D-9. Vijaydas has also pointed out that he

> > had

> > > trouble with aspects in D-charts. Now don't you

> > see a

> > > contradiction? Unfortunately we can not talk to

> > > Santhanam or BV Ramna now.

> > >

> > > I hope people undersatnd the point I am trying to

> > > convey. Science is not static, universe is not

> > static

> > > and our understanding of jyotish also can not be

> > > static.

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> > > Satish

> > > --- vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep@>

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > > Dear Prafulla ji

> > > >

> > > > You are still not getting the point.

> > > >

> > > > 1)K.N.Raoji considers aspects as well as bhavas

> > -

> > > > But says

> > > > Karakamsha has to be seen from Rashi.Shri Sanjay

> > > > Rath says,

> > > >

> > > > 2)Late Santhanam considers 7th from ,10th from

> > etc

> > > > from navamsha

> > > > lagna in navamsha arrangement.But he says

> > aspects

> > > > cannot be seen

> > > > there.Shri Bhaskar and you are missing this

> > point

> > > > and assuming those

> > > > as aspects.He is clear regarding aspects.Pls try

> > to

> > > > understand why

> > > > aspects are not possible.For this you have to

> > try

> > > > for yourslef,how

> > > > navamsha is done.If you need any help in this

> > regard

> > > > ,i can take a

> > > > chart and explain.But onyl if you want.

> > > >

> > > > For the same reason(considering them as a chart)

> > > > ,Late Santhanam was

> > > > unable to interpret shadvargake shloka.Sage is

> > > > talking only about

> > > > Lagnas shadvargas and not charts.

> > > >

> > > > In reality they all happen within Rashi

> > chakra.Some

> > > > recognize

> > > > this ,but only in certain instances.

> > > >

> > > > As per the explanation from great

> > grandfathers,it is

> > > > very clear.If i

> > > > follow their views i can understand each and

> > every

> > > > shloka in BPHS

> > > > without any concern.It is uptto you to choose

> > your

> > > > path.

> > > >

> > > > Regds

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

___________________

_

> > ______________

> > > Need a vacation? Get great deals

> > > to amazing places on Travel.

> > > http://travel./

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

___________________

_______________

> oneSearch: Finally, mobile search

> that gives answers, not web links.

> http://mobile./mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC

>