[JG] To all those who want Astronomical explanation of Aspects in Amsa charts-27/7

[Guest guest]

Dear Satya

 

for a start I wanted to limit myself to this part alone good u put it again

separately.

 

Well most of sanskrit terms can't find the right equivalent of English names

like Dharma, Karma, Shrama, Yoga, etc all have different meanings in a

particular context still we can max bring a closer English word not the

intended meaning in that situation as languages born from Sanskrit can

picturise them

 

likewise Graha is not a planet per se so we can't that in terms of

astronomical planet at least

in the same Vein Ravi is a star in astronomy inst it is it not diminishing

its might when we call it a Planet

 

Graha in Sanskrit and for astrological reasoning is all light emanating

bodies, this is how some astral bodies like Gulika, Indra chapa, mandi etc

are also in the list [upgrahas again not the satelite perse] all light

emanating bodies and light need not be from the known visual spectrum leave

alone visible light spectrum and the ultra violet and infra red bands of

light. as it is Jyotshya- a subject of Light is the right word and astrology

is a weaker word for it in comparison.

 

Our shastras talk of 14 lokas again must not be loosely confused with worlds

can mean 14 strata where life is possible in any form for an insect to a

mammal organic and inorganic matter etc.

 

my attn was more on so called scientific labels we must not reduce it to

them but get the essence of them

we must not *Missing the wood for the trees*.

 

Personally I would like to contribute more on reading charts as it helps

people than this debates which may go in circles. in the name of scienticif

bent of mind we can't turn the tables upside down

the systems laid by our rishis are well founded and cant last any more

thousand of years all we need is to understand its essence and tune it for

the times we live in

 

just as the Wheel the corner stone of civilisation has been, a conveyance

that can start from a bullock cart to a space shuttle are all still on

wheels it is mere adaptation that is needed. we can't invent any other wheel

form than a circle isn't it? the propellants can be different/

 

 

Best wishes

 

 

 

On 7/27/07, Satya Sai Kolachina <skolachi wrote:

>

> Small correction.

>

> Please read as : I am sure that Rahu and Kethu are planets according

> to Vedic astrology.

>

> I typed a 'not' as a typographical error.

>

> Satya

>

> <%40>,

> " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> <skolachi wrote:

> >

> > As I am fedup with the hypocricy of those who look for 100%

> > paralance of astronomical evidence for aspects in Amsa charts, I

> am

> > putting these questions straight to those people. Since you have

> > scientific bent of mind, I appreciate it, and I, as a simple

> > astrologer, am looking for answers for these very simple questions

> > that bother me.

> > This mail is not for those who have the habit of skipping

> > inconvenient questions, or diverting the attention of the public.

> >

> > What is the astronomical basis of calling Jupiter as the Vaamana

> > incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > What is the astronomical basis of calling Angaaraka (Mangal)

> calling

> > as Nrisimha incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > (same question repeated for all the incarnations of Lord Vishnu.

> > Similarly what is astronomical basis of assigning castes to these

> > planets?

> > Rahu and Kethu are NOT PLANETS according to ASTRONOMY; I am not

> sure

> > they are planets according to VEDIC ASTROLOGY.

> > There are many other questions. At least these questions are from

> > the first couple of chapters of BPHS. I am not even going into

> > depths of BPHS, as it is not required for these simple questions.

> > These form part of the basis for our predictions.

> >

> > I do not need answers with respect to BPHS or any of our classics,

> > since they already support these concepts.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Satya S Kolachina

> > <%40>,

> " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Astronomically Rahu and Kethu are only Nodes of moon; but they

> > have

> > > been given the status of plaents by our Maha munis. What I was

> > > saying is do not bring 100% astronomical paralance into vedic

> > > astrology, as it fails in several areas.

> > >

> > > I hope you can understand English and hence understand what I am

> > > saying here.

> > > Satya

> > >

> > > <%40>,

> " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Satya ji

> > > >

> > > > You are talking in the language of Yukthi Vaadis,who does not

> > know

> > > > astrology but keep on critizing it.But you are not like

> that.You

> > > are

> > > > well aversed in astrology.You may not talk in that fashion.

> > > >

> > > > 1)Rahu & Ketu are astronomical points -Nodes of Moon -

> > > > Philosophically they are the intersection of Atma-Mana padha.

> > > >

> > > > 2)Sun and Moon -They are considered as ''Grahas'' by

> > > > Mahamunis.Planet is an English term.

> > > >

> > > > Gola ,Ganita,Hora - Mahamunis did not devise anything for

> > > fun.There

> > > > is a strong basis.

> > > >

> > > > Similarly the rules for aspect and their evaluations can be

> > > > objectively measured in a mathematical fashion.

> > > >

> > > > Regds

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > <%40>,

> " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Sri Kursija,

> > > > >

> > > > > Astronomy doesn't define 9 planets as incarnations of Lord

> > > Vishnu.

> > > > > Astronomy doesn't define Rahu and Kethu as planets. Even Sun

> > and

> > > > Moon

> > > > > are not planets astronomically.

> > > > > Astronomy doesn't define planets into different castes like

> > > > Brahmin,

> > > > > Khathriya, Vaishya and Sudra etc. THere are many things you

> > > cannot

> > > > > get from astronomy. Our seers gave Vedic astrology thousands

> > of

> > > > years

> > > > > ago, whereas the science of astronomy developed much later.

> > > > >

> > > > > If you start talking in strict astronomical sense,

> Vedic/Hindu

> > > > > astrology doesn't fit in there. The closest approximation to

> > > > > astronomy is only the Western astrology; which some people

> > > follow.

> > > > > Let us not be hypocritical. If we follow Vedic astrology,

> let

> > us

> > > > not

> > > > > feel bad to take the vedic astrology concepts as they are.

> > > > >

> > > > > Vedic astrology is more than science; it is divine science.

> > You

> > > do

> > > > > not have to accept what I say. For that matter no one has to

> > > > accept

> > > > > what I say. But, when you try to equate something, do not do

> > it

> > > > > selectively.

> > > > >

> > > > > There is a concept of divinity superimposed over the

> > > astronomical

> > > > > facts; some concepts seem to be apparently known to us;

> there

> > > are

> > > > > many concepts not known or lost in the past centuries.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > >

> > > > > Satya S Kolachina

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > <%40>,

> " S.C. Kursija "

> > <sckursija@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respected members of the forum,

> > > > > > I tried my best to keep away from this endless

> > > > > > discussion but not with out poin. It has got its own

> > > > > > merits. But the discussion is turning into criticism

> > > > > > and trying to prove that other is worng. This is not a

> > > > > > healthy way of discussion.

> > > > > > Up till now I have not seen any member Who discuss

> > > > > > the aspect. Why we have taken aspect in astrology? The

> > > > > > aspect refers to an angular distance

> > > > > > between two celestial bodies measured along the

> > > > > > ecliptic. So all terms used in astrology are based on

> > > > > > astronomy. If we take into consideration the

> > > > > > definition of aspect in astronomy, there will not be

> > > > > > any confusion whether we should use aspect in varga or

> > > > > > not. The varga are not configuration of the planets on

> > > > > > the bases of astronomy. We have created varga to look

> > > > > > deep into the different aspects of life. The rashi

> > > > > > chart is the map of the planets at the time of birth.

> > > > > > It the nature position of the planets. The varga are

> > > > > > the creation of astrologers not the nature or the

> > > > > > Universe.Though Astrology is based on astronomy and

> > > > > > mathematic, but not whimsical. It is a science.So

> > > > > > aspect should not be seen in vargas.If any how we find

> > > > > > out that one or two shlokas in one classic in favor of

> > > > > > use of aspects in varga, it does not prove that aspect

> > > > > > should be used in vergas.Why other classics are

> > > > > > silent. Does astronomy allows it? If astronomy does

> > > > > > not allows the same, we should reject the same

> > > > > > immediately. The astrology is based on astronomy. The

> > > > > > astronomy is not based on astrology. We have converted

> > > > > > astronomy into the astrology for the benefit of human

> > > > > > kind and universe to understand the future. Respect

> > > > > > the astronomy not any person who ever he may be.The

> > > > > > astrologers have developed the habit of giving

> > > > > > explanation when event has taken place and try to fit

> > > > > > the event in astrology, but does not improve himself

> > > > > > and astrology. I have repeatedly requested the indian

> > > > > > astronomers and mathematicians to modify and rectify

> > > > > > the data of the astrology according to the present

> > > > > > position of the planets and point of equinox so that

> > > > > > we may be able to predict earth quake,pattern of rain

> > > > > > and seasons, say mundane events.

> > > > > > I do not want to criticise any one. If my words have

> > > > > > hurt any body, I feel sorry for the same.

> > > > > > --- vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep@>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > This is really painful.You are really testing

> > > > > > > patience.How many times

> > > > > > > i have to tell you this.Should i bring the mail in

> > > > > > > which i have

> > > > > > > answered the same question to you.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I clealry said,since he considered Varga charts -he

> > > > > > > could notexplain

> > > > > > > Lagna shadvargake shloka.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Do you think others in this goup are fools.Do you

> > > > > > > think this tactic

> > > > > > > will work.It is there in the archives ,about what i

> > > > > > > have said.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > In <%40>,

> " Prafulla Gang "

> > > > > > > <jyotish@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep ji

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Do you agree with Shri Santhanam's conviction of

> > > > > > > varga charts? I am

> > > > > > > > repeatedly questioning your misquote, as he even

> > > > > > > used aspects. You

> > > > > > > > should not refer himn selectively. You do agree

> > > > > > > with his 10th line

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > the poem (i.e. aspects) , So I presume - you agree

> > > > > > > with first 9

> > > > > > > lines

> > > > > > > > also (i.e. varga chakra, the yogas there, houses

> > > > > > > there and so son).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In

<%40>

> ,

> > > > > > > " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Respected members

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Grahasphuta Drishti Kadhanadhyaya in BPHS talks

> > > > > > > about the drishti

> > > > > > > > > other than Rashi drishti mentioned in earlier

> > > > > > > chapter.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Here sage says,apart from the common or

> > > > > > > ordinary(Samanya) way of

> > > > > > > > > seeing raha drshti we can evaluate graha drishti

> > > > > > > based on

> > > > > > > longitude.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Then sage describes how the strength of Graha

> > > > > > > drishtis can be

> > > > > > > > > evaluated.As Jupiter ,Mars and Saturn has

> > > > > > > special aspects there

> > > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > > special rules mentioned to evaluate their

> > > > > > > strength as well.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > So being the case,Shri Santhanam or any other

> > > > > > > astrologer ,translator

> > > > > > > > > cannot have a different view.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Now as varga placements are purely based on

> > > > > > > varga lordship within

> > > > > > > a

> > > > > > > > > Rashi,the longitudinal identity and Rasmi has no

> > > > > > > role to play.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > This is enough for any studen to understand what

> > > > > > > is what.Moreover

> > > > > > > > > shri Santhanam has categorically stated (for

> > > > > > > those who are still

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > clear) that graha drishti is beyond my

> > > > > > > understanding in Varga

> > > > > > > Chakras.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Thus i will not comment any more on Late

> > > > > > > Santhanams comment.There

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > nothing more to add.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

[Guest guest]

Dear Prashant,

 

There are other questions also I raised, which you did not seem to

attempt here.

But I still appreciate your attempt to get the essense of any

subject and then comparison may make sense between subjects; this is

what I was trying to convey to the people when they are looking for

every thing in black and white, when they look into Vedic astrology.

Our knowledge on both astronomy and vedic astrology is too little to

make such a comparison.

 

If one looks for astronomical calculations to find aspects in varga

charts; they may not find one today. Of course, it doesn't mean that

those great astrologers of yester years have done blunder using

these charts.

 

In the name of research we cannot dismiss or reject everything that

we cannot understand.

 

I will narrate an incident here.

 

One person used to argue that 'whatever he doesn't see, he cannot

believe in it; he says that he doesn't believe in existence of GOD

as he cannot see him'.

Then I asked him showing through the window 'what is behind that

building?'

He said 'there is a lake behind that building'.

Then I told him, based on his own argument 'I do not believe that

there is a lake, since I cannot see it'.

Then he said, 'If you go there you will see the lake'.

Then I said 'Right. You got the right answer for your problem. If I

take extra efforts of going there, then I can see the lake.

Similarly if you put extra efforts to know GOD, you will know him

too'. He agreed to my answer.

 

Similarly, if we put extra efforts in understanding our Vedic

astrology, there are pearls underneath it. Instead, if we keep

arguing that I don't believe since the mathematics doesn't support

it; no one can help that person. I said earlier. Vedic astrology is

DIVINE SCIENCE; not just a simple science. One should have a divine

outlook to understand this subject.

 

Thanks for sharing your views,

 

Regards,

 

 

, " astro desk "

<astro.prashantkumar wrote:

>

> Dear Satya

>

> for a start I wanted to limit myself to this part alone good u put

it again

> separately.

>

> Well most of sanskrit terms can't find the right equivalent of

English names

> like Dharma, Karma, Shrama, Yoga, etc all have different meanings

in a

> particular context still we can max bring a closer English word

not the

> intended meaning in that situation as languages born from Sanskrit

can

> picturise them

>

> likewise Graha is not a planet per se so we can't that in terms of

> astronomical planet at least

> in the same Vein Ravi is a star in astronomy inst it is it not

diminishing

> its might when we call it a Planet

>

> Graha in Sanskrit and for astrological reasoning is all light

emanating

> bodies, this is how some astral bodies like Gulika, Indra chapa,

mandi etc

> are also in the list [upgrahas again not the satelite perse] all

light

> emanating bodies and light need not be from the known visual

spectrum leave

> alone visible light spectrum and the ultra violet and infra red

bands of

> light. as it is Jyotshya- a subject of Light is the right word and

astrology

> is a weaker word for it in comparison.

>

> Our shastras talk of 14 lokas again must not be loosely confused

with worlds

> can mean 14 strata where life is possible in any form for an

insect to a

> mammal organic and inorganic matter etc.

>

> my attn was more on so called scientific labels we must not reduce

it to

> them but get the essence of them

> we must not *Missing the wood for the trees*.

>

> Personally I would like to contribute more on reading charts as it

helps

> people than this debates which may go in circles. in the name of

scienticif

> bent of mind we can't turn the tables upside down

> the systems laid by our rishis are well founded and cant last any

more

> thousand of years all we need is to understand its essence and

tune it for

> the times we live in

>

> just as the Wheel the corner stone of civilisation has been, a

conveyance

> that can start from a bullock cart to a space shuttle are all

still on

> wheels it is mere adaptation that is needed. we can't invent any

other wheel

> form than a circle isn't it? the propellants can be different/

>

>

> Best wishes

>

>

>

> On 7/27/07, Satya Sai Kolachina <skolachi wrote:

> >

> > Small correction.

> >

> > Please read as : I am sure that Rahu and Kethu are planets

according

> > to Vedic astrology.

> >

> > I typed a 'not' as a typographical error.

> >

> > Satya

> >

> > <%

40>,

> > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > >

> > > As I am fedup with the hypocricy of those who look for 100%

> > > paralance of astronomical evidence for aspects in Amsa charts,

I

> > am

> > > putting these questions straight to those people. Since you

have

> > > scientific bent of mind, I appreciate it, and I, as a simple

> > > astrologer, am looking for answers for these very simple

questions

> > > that bother me.

> > > This mail is not for those who have the habit of skipping

> > > inconvenient questions, or diverting the attention of the

public.

> > >

> > > What is the astronomical basis of calling Jupiter as the

Vaamana

> > > incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > > What is the astronomical basis of calling Angaaraka (Mangal)

> > calling

> > > as Nrisimha incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > > (same question repeated for all the incarnations of Lord

Vishnu.

> > > Similarly what is astronomical basis of assigning castes to

these

> > > planets?

> > > Rahu and Kethu are NOT PLANETS according to ASTRONOMY; I am not

> > sure

> > > they are planets according to VEDIC ASTROLOGY.

> > > There are many other questions. At least these questions are

from

> > > the first couple of chapters of BPHS. I am not even going into

> > > depths of BPHS, as it is not required for these simple

questions.

> > > These form part of the basis for our predictions.

> > >

> > > I do not need answers with respect to BPHS or any of our

classics,

> > > since they already support these concepts.

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Satya S Kolachina

> > > <%

40>,

> > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Astronomically Rahu and Kethu are only Nodes of moon; but

they

> > > have

> > > > been given the status of plaents by our Maha munis. What I

was

> > > > saying is do not bring 100% astronomical paralance into vedic

> > > > astrology, as it fails in several areas.

> > > >

> > > > I hope you can understand English and hence understand what

I am

> > > > saying here.

> > > > Satya

> > > >

> > > > <%

40>,

> > " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Satya ji

> > > > >

> > > > > You are talking in the language of Yukthi Vaadis,who does

not

> > > know

> > > > > astrology but keep on critizing it.But you are not like

> > that.You

> > > > are

> > > > > well aversed in astrology.You may not talk in that fashion.

> > > > >

> > > > > 1)Rahu & Ketu are astronomical points -Nodes of Moon -

> > > > > Philosophically they are the intersection of Atma-Mana

padha.

> > > > >

> > > > > 2)Sun and Moon -They are considered as ''Grahas'' by

> > > > > Mahamunis.Planet is an English term.

> > > > >

> > > > > Gola ,Ganita,Hora - Mahamunis did not devise anything for

> > > > fun.There

> > > > > is a strong basis.

> > > > >

> > > > > Similarly the rules for aspect and their evaluations can be

> > > > > objectively measured in a mathematical fashion.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regds

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > <%

40>,

> > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Sri Kursija,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define 9 planets as incarnations of

Lord

> > > > Vishnu.

> > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define Rahu and Kethu as planets. Even

Sun

> > > and

> > > > > Moon

> > > > > > are not planets astronomically.

> > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define planets into different castes

like

> > > > > Brahmin,

> > > > > > Khathriya, Vaishya and Sudra etc. THere are many things

you

> > > > cannot

> > > > > > get from astronomy. Our seers gave Vedic astrology

thousands

> > > of

> > > > > years

> > > > > > ago, whereas the science of astronomy developed much

later.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > If you start talking in strict astronomical sense,

> > Vedic/Hindu

> > > > > > astrology doesn't fit in there. The closest

approximation to

> > > > > > astronomy is only the Western astrology; which some

people

> > > > follow.

> > > > > > Let us not be hypocritical. If we follow Vedic astrology,

> > let

> > > us

> > > > > not

> > > > > > feel bad to take the vedic astrology concepts as they

are.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Vedic astrology is more than science; it is divine

science.

> > > You

> > > > do

> > > > > > not have to accept what I say. For that matter no one

has to

> > > > > accept

> > > > > > what I say. But, when you try to equate something, do

not do

> > > it

> > > > > > selectively.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > There is a concept of divinity superimposed over the

> > > > astronomical

> > > > > > facts; some concepts seem to be apparently known to us;

> > there

> > > > are

> > > > > > many concepts not known or lost in the past centuries.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Satya S Kolachina

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > <%

40>,

> > " S.C. Kursija "

> > > <sckursija@>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Respected members of the forum,

> > > > > > > I tried my best to keep away from this endless

> > > > > > > discussion but not with out poin. It has got its own

> > > > > > > merits. But the discussion is turning into criticism

> > > > > > > and trying to prove that other is worng. This is not a

> > > > > > > healthy way of discussion.

> > > > > > > Up till now I have not seen any member Who discuss

> > > > > > > the aspect. Why we have taken aspect in astrology? The

> > > > > > > aspect refers to an angular distance

> > > > > > > between two celestial bodies measured along the

> > > > > > > ecliptic. So all terms used in astrology are based on

> > > > > > > astronomy. If we take into consideration the

> > > > > > > definition of aspect in astronomy, there will not be

> > > > > > > any confusion whether we should use aspect in varga or

> > > > > > > not. The varga are not configuration of the planets on

> > > > > > > the bases of astronomy. We have created varga to look

> > > > > > > deep into the different aspects of life. The rashi

> > > > > > > chart is the map of the planets at the time of birth.

> > > > > > > It the nature position of the planets. The varga are

> > > > > > > the creation of astrologers not the nature or the

> > > > > > > Universe.Though Astrology is based on astronomy and

> > > > > > > mathematic, but not whimsical. It is a science.So

> > > > > > > aspect should not be seen in vargas.If any how we find

> > > > > > > out that one or two shlokas in one classic in favor of

> > > > > > > use of aspects in varga, it does not prove that aspect

> > > > > > > should be used in vergas.Why other classics are

> > > > > > > silent. Does astronomy allows it? If astronomy does

> > > > > > > not allows the same, we should reject the same

> > > > > > > immediately. The astrology is based on astronomy. The

> > > > > > > astronomy is not based on astrology. We have converted

> > > > > > > astronomy into the astrology for the benefit of human

> > > > > > > kind and universe to understand the future. Respect

> > > > > > > the astronomy not any person who ever he may be.The

> > > > > > > astrologers have developed the habit of giving

> > > > > > > explanation when event has taken place and try to fit

> > > > > > > the event in astrology, but does not improve himself

> > > > > > > and astrology. I have repeatedly requested the indian

> > > > > > > astronomers and mathematicians to modify and rectify

> > > > > > > the data of the astrology according to the present

> > > > > > > position of the planets and point of equinox so that

> > > > > > > we may be able to predict earth quake,pattern of rain

> > > > > > > and seasons, say mundane events.

> > > > > > > I do not want to criticise any one. If my words have

> > > > > > > hurt any body, I feel sorry for the same.

> > > > > > > --- vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep@>

> > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > This is really painful.You are really testing

> > > > > > > > patience.How many times

> > > > > > > > i have to tell you this.Should i bring the mail in

> > > > > > > > which i have

> > > > > > > > answered the same question to you.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I clealry said,since he considered Varga charts -he

> > > > > > > > could notexplain

> > > > > > > > Lagna shadvargake shloka.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Do you think others in this goup are fools.Do you

> > > > > > > > think this tactic

> > > > > > > > will work.It is there in the archives ,about what i

> > > > > > > > have said.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > In <%

40>,

> > " Prafulla Gang "

> > > > > > > > <jyotish@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep ji

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Do you agree with Shri Santhanam's conviction of

> > > > > > > > varga charts? I am

> > > > > > > > > repeatedly questioning your misquote, as he even

> > > > > > > > used aspects. You

> > > > > > > > > should not refer himn selectively. You do agree

> > > > > > > > with his 10th line

> > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > the poem (i.e. aspects) , So I presume - you agree

> > > > > > > > with first 9

> > > > > > > > lines

> > > > > > > > > also (i.e. varga chakra, the yogas there, houses

> > > > > > > > there and so son).

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > <%

40>

> > ,

> > > > > > > > " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Respected members

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Grahasphuta Drishti Kadhanadhyaya in BPHS talks

> > > > > > > > about the drishti

> > > > > > > > > > other than Rashi drishti mentioned in earlier

> > > > > > > > chapter.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Here sage says,apart from the common or

> > > > > > > > ordinary(Samanya) way of

> > > > > > > > > > seeing raha drshti we can evaluate graha drishti

> > > > > > > > based on

> > > > > > > > longitude.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Then sage describes how the strength of Graha

> > > > > > > > drishtis can be

> > > > > > > > > > evaluated.As Jupiter ,Mars and Saturn has

> > > > > > > > special aspects there

> > > > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > > > special rules mentioned to evaluate their

> > > > > > > > strength as well.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > So being the case,Shri Santhanam or any other

> > > > > > > > astrologer ,translator

> > > > > > > > > > cannot have a different view.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Now as varga placements are purely based on

> > > > > > > > varga lordship within

> > > > > > > > a

> > > > > > > > > > Rashi,the longitudinal identity and Rasmi has no

> > > > > > > > role to play.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > This is enough for any studen to understand what

> > > > > > > > is what.Moreover

> > > > > > > > > > shri Santhanam has categorically stated (for

> > > > > > > > those who are still

> > > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > > clear) that graha drishti is beyond my

> > > > > > > > understanding in Varga

> > > > > > > > Chakras.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Thus i will not comment any more on Late

> > > > > > > > Santhanams comment.There

> > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > nothing more to add.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

[Guest guest]

Dear Satya ji / Prashant ji,

 

As Prashant ji has written Planets Emanate lights..

 

i would like to correct him that planets only REFLECT light.

 

because source of light in Galaxy is sun.

and the planets reflect particular colour i.e. Yellow by Jupiter,

Red by mars and so on.

 

So i guess just little interpretation in sanskrit can lead to Change

in the real meaning.

 

 

sorry to jump in this mail.

 

regards

 

Tarun

 

, " Satya Sai Kolachina "

<skolachi wrote:

>

> Dear Prashant,

>

> There are other questions also I raised, which you did not seem to

> attempt here.

> But I still appreciate your attempt to get the essense of any

> subject and then comparison may make sense between subjects; this

is

> what I was trying to convey to the people when they are looking for

> every thing in black and white, when they look into Vedic

astrology.

> Our knowledge on both astronomy and vedic astrology is too little

to

> make such a comparison.

>

> If one looks for astronomical calculations to find aspects in varga

> charts; they may not find one today. Of course, it doesn't mean

that

> those great astrologers of yester years have done blunder using

> these charts.

>

> In the name of research we cannot dismiss or reject everything that

> we cannot understand.

>

> I will narrate an incident here.

>

> One person used to argue that 'whatever he doesn't see, he cannot

> believe in it; he says that he doesn't believe in existence of GOD

> as he cannot see him'.

> Then I asked him showing through the window 'what is behind that

> building?'

> He said 'there is a lake behind that building'.

> Then I told him, based on his own argument 'I do not believe that

> there is a lake, since I cannot see it'.

> Then he said, 'If you go there you will see the lake'.

> Then I said 'Right. You got the right answer for your problem. If I

> take extra efforts of going there, then I can see the lake.

> Similarly if you put extra efforts to know GOD, you will know him

> too'. He agreed to my answer.

>

> Similarly, if we put extra efforts in understanding our Vedic

> astrology, there are pearls underneath it. Instead, if we keep

> arguing that I don't believe since the mathematics doesn't support

> it; no one can help that person. I said earlier. Vedic astrology is

> DIVINE SCIENCE; not just a simple science. One should have a divine

> outlook to understand this subject.

>

> Thanks for sharing your views,

>

> Regards,

>

>

> , " astro desk "

> <astro.prashantkumar@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Satya

> >

> > for a start I wanted to limit myself to this part alone good u

put

> it again

> > separately.

> >

> > Well most of sanskrit terms can't find the right equivalent of

> English names

> > like Dharma, Karma, Shrama, Yoga, etc all have different meanings

> in a

> > particular context still we can max bring a closer English word

> not the

> > intended meaning in that situation as languages born from

Sanskrit

> can

> > picturise them

> >

> > likewise Graha is not a planet per se so we can't that in terms of

> > astronomical planet at least

> > in the same Vein Ravi is a star in astronomy inst it is it not

> diminishing

> > its might when we call it a Planet

> >

> > Graha in Sanskrit and for astrological reasoning is all light

> emanating

> > bodies, this is how some astral bodies like Gulika, Indra chapa,

> mandi etc

> > are also in the list [upgrahas again not the satelite perse] all

> light

> > emanating bodies and light need not be from the known visual

> spectrum leave

> > alone visible light spectrum and the ultra violet and infra red

> bands of

> > light. as it is Jyotshya- a subject of Light is the right word

and

> astrology

> > is a weaker word for it in comparison.

> >

> > Our shastras talk of 14 lokas again must not be loosely confused

> with worlds

> > can mean 14 strata where life is possible in any form for an

> insect to a

> > mammal organic and inorganic matter etc.

> >

> > my attn was more on so called scientific labels we must not

reduce

> it to

> > them but get the essence of them

> > we must not *Missing the wood for the trees*.

> >

> > Personally I would like to contribute more on reading charts as

it

> helps

> > people than this debates which may go in circles. in the name of

> scienticif

> > bent of mind we can't turn the tables upside down

> > the systems laid by our rishis are well founded and cant last

any

> more

> > thousand of years all we need is to understand its essence and

> tune it for

> > the times we live in

> >

> > just as the Wheel the corner stone of civilisation has been, a

> conveyance

> > that can start from a bullock cart to a space shuttle are all

> still on

> > wheels it is mere adaptation that is needed. we can't invent any

> other wheel

> > form than a circle isn't it? the propellants can be different/

> >

> >

> > Best wishes

> >

> >

> >

> > On 7/27/07, Satya Sai Kolachina <skolachi@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Small correction.

> > >

> > > Please read as : I am sure that Rahu and Kethu are planets

> according

> > > to Vedic astrology.

> > >

> > > I typed a 'not' as a typographical error.

> > >

> > > Satya

> > >

> > > <%

> 40>,

> > > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > As I am fedup with the hypocricy of those who look for 100%

> > > > paralance of astronomical evidence for aspects in Amsa

charts,

> I

> > > am

> > > > putting these questions straight to those people. Since you

> have

> > > > scientific bent of mind, I appreciate it, and I, as a simple

> > > > astrologer, am looking for answers for these very simple

> questions

> > > > that bother me.

> > > > This mail is not for those who have the habit of skipping

> > > > inconvenient questions, or diverting the attention of the

> public.

> > > >

> > > > What is the astronomical basis of calling Jupiter as the

> Vaamana

> > > > incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > > > What is the astronomical basis of calling Angaaraka (Mangal)

> > > calling

> > > > as Nrisimha incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > > > (same question repeated for all the incarnations of Lord

> Vishnu.

> > > > Similarly what is astronomical basis of assigning castes to

> these

> > > > planets?

> > > > Rahu and Kethu are NOT PLANETS according to ASTRONOMY; I am

not

> > > sure

> > > > they are planets according to VEDIC ASTROLOGY.

> > > > There are many other questions. At least these questions are

> from

> > > > the first couple of chapters of BPHS. I am not even going into

> > > > depths of BPHS, as it is not required for these simple

> questions.

> > > > These form part of the basis for our predictions.

> > > >

> > > > I do not need answers with respect to BPHS or any of our

> classics,

> > > > since they already support these concepts.

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Satya S Kolachina

> > > > <%

> 40>,

> > > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Astronomically Rahu and Kethu are only Nodes of moon; but

> they

> > > > have

> > > > > been given the status of plaents by our Maha munis. What I

> was

> > > > > saying is do not bring 100% astronomical paralance into

vedic

> > > > > astrology, as it fails in several areas.

> > > > >

> > > > > I hope you can understand English and hence understand what

> I am

> > > > > saying here.

> > > > > Satya

> > > > >

> > > > > <%

> 40>,

> > > " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Satya ji

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You are talking in the language of Yukthi Vaadis,who does

> not

> > > > know

> > > > > > astrology but keep on critizing it.But you are not like

> > > that.You

> > > > > are

> > > > > > well aversed in astrology.You may not talk in that

fashion.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 1)Rahu & Ketu are astronomical points -Nodes of Moon -

> > > > > > Philosophically they are the intersection of Atma-Mana

> padha.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 2)Sun and Moon -They are considered as ''Grahas'' by

> > > > > > Mahamunis.Planet is an English term.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Gola ,Ganita,Hora - Mahamunis did not devise anything for

> > > > > fun.There

> > > > > > is a strong basis.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Similarly the rules for aspect and their evaluations can

be

> > > > > > objectively measured in a mathematical fashion.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > <%

> 40>,

> > > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > > > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Sri Kursija,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define 9 planets as incarnations of

> Lord

> > > > > Vishnu.

> > > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define Rahu and Kethu as planets.

Even

> Sun

> > > > and

> > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > are not planets astronomically.

> > > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define planets into different castes

> like

> > > > > > Brahmin,

> > > > > > > Khathriya, Vaishya and Sudra etc. THere are many things

> you

> > > > > cannot

> > > > > > > get from astronomy. Our seers gave Vedic astrology

> thousands

> > > > of

> > > > > > years

> > > > > > > ago, whereas the science of astronomy developed much

> later.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > If you start talking in strict astronomical sense,

> > > Vedic/Hindu

> > > > > > > astrology doesn't fit in there. The closest

> approximation to

> > > > > > > astronomy is only the Western astrology; which some

> people

> > > > > follow.

> > > > > > > Let us not be hypocritical. If we follow Vedic

astrology,

> > > let

> > > > us

> > > > > > not

> > > > > > > feel bad to take the vedic astrology concepts as they

> are.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Vedic astrology is more than science; it is divine

> science.

> > > > You

> > > > > do

> > > > > > > not have to accept what I say. For that matter no one

> has to

> > > > > > accept

> > > > > > > what I say. But, when you try to equate something, do

> not do

> > > > it

> > > > > > > selectively.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > There is a concept of divinity superimposed over the

> > > > > astronomical

> > > > > > > facts; some concepts seem to be apparently known to us;

> > > there

> > > > > are

> > > > > > > many concepts not known or lost in the past centuries.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Satya S Kolachina

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > <%

> 40>,

> > > " S.C. Kursija "

> > > > <sckursija@>

> > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Respected members of the forum,

> > > > > > > > I tried my best to keep away from this endless

> > > > > > > > discussion but not with out poin. It has got its own

> > > > > > > > merits. But the discussion is turning into criticism

> > > > > > > > and trying to prove that other is worng. This is not a

> > > > > > > > healthy way of discussion.

> > > > > > > > Up till now I have not seen any member Who discuss

> > > > > > > > the aspect. Why we have taken aspect in astrology? The

> > > > > > > > aspect refers to an angular distance

> > > > > > > > between two celestial bodies measured along the

> > > > > > > > ecliptic. So all terms used in astrology are based on

> > > > > > > > astronomy. If we take into consideration the

> > > > > > > > definition of aspect in astronomy, there will not be

> > > > > > > > any confusion whether we should use aspect in varga or

> > > > > > > > not. The varga are not configuration of the planets on

> > > > > > > > the bases of astronomy. We have created varga to look

> > > > > > > > deep into the different aspects of life. The rashi

> > > > > > > > chart is the map of the planets at the time of birth.

> > > > > > > > It the nature position of the planets. The varga are

> > > > > > > > the creation of astrologers not the nature or the

> > > > > > > > Universe.Though Astrology is based on astronomy and

> > > > > > > > mathematic, but not whimsical. It is a science.So

> > > > > > > > aspect should not be seen in vargas.If any how we find

> > > > > > > > out that one or two shlokas in one classic in favor of

> > > > > > > > use of aspects in varga, it does not prove that aspect

> > > > > > > > should be used in vergas.Why other classics are

> > > > > > > > silent. Does astronomy allows it? If astronomy does

> > > > > > > > not allows the same, we should reject the same

> > > > > > > > immediately. The astrology is based on astronomy. The

> > > > > > > > astronomy is not based on astrology. We have converted

> > > > > > > > astronomy into the astrology for the benefit of human

> > > > > > > > kind and universe to understand the future. Respect

> > > > > > > > the astronomy not any person who ever he may be.The

> > > > > > > > astrologers have developed the habit of giving

> > > > > > > > explanation when event has taken place and try to fit

> > > > > > > > the event in astrology, but does not improve himself

> > > > > > > > and astrology. I have repeatedly requested the indian

> > > > > > > > astronomers and mathematicians to modify and rectify

> > > > > > > > the data of the astrology according to the present

> > > > > > > > position of the planets and point of equinox so that

> > > > > > > > we may be able to predict earth quake,pattern of rain

> > > > > > > > and seasons, say mundane events.

> > > > > > > > I do not want to criticise any one. If my words have

> > > > > > > > hurt any body, I feel sorry for the same.

> > > > > > > > --- vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep@>

> > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > This is really painful.You are really testing

> > > > > > > > > patience.How many times

> > > > > > > > > i have to tell you this.Should i bring the mail in

> > > > > > > > > which i have

> > > > > > > > > answered the same question to you.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I clealry said,since he considered Varga charts -he

> > > > > > > > > could notexplain

> > > > > > > > > Lagna shadvargake shloka.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Do you think others in this goup are fools.Do you

> > > > > > > > > think this tactic

> > > > > > > > > will work.It is there in the archives ,about what i

> > > > > > > > > have said.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > In <%

> 40>,

> > > " Prafulla Gang "

> > > > > > > > > <jyotish@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep ji

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Do you agree with Shri Santhanam's conviction of

> > > > > > > > > varga charts? I am

> > > > > > > > > > repeatedly questioning your misquote, as he even

> > > > > > > > > used aspects. You

> > > > > > > > > > should not refer himn selectively. You do agree

> > > > > > > > > with his 10th line

> > > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > the poem (i.e. aspects) , So I presume - you agree

> > > > > > > > > with first 9

> > > > > > > > > lines

> > > > > > > > > > also (i.e. varga chakra, the yogas there, houses

> > > > > > > > > there and so son).

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > <%

> 40>

> > > ,

> > > > > > > > > " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Dear Respected members

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Grahasphuta Drishti Kadhanadhyaya in BPHS talks

> > > > > > > > > about the drishti

> > > > > > > > > > > other than Rashi drishti mentioned in earlier

> > > > > > > > > chapter.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Here sage says,apart from the common or

> > > > > > > > > ordinary(Samanya) way of

> > > > > > > > > > > seeing raha drshti we can evaluate graha drishti

> > > > > > > > > based on

> > > > > > > > > longitude.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Then sage describes how the strength of Graha

> > > > > > > > > drishtis can be

> > > > > > > > > > > evaluated.As Jupiter ,Mars and Saturn has

> > > > > > > > > special aspects there

> > > > > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > > > > special rules mentioned to evaluate their

> > > > > > > > > strength as well.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > So being the case,Shri Santhanam or any other

> > > > > > > > > astrologer ,translator

> > > > > > > > > > > cannot have a different view.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Now as varga placements are purely based on

> > > > > > > > > varga lordship within

> > > > > > > > > a

> > > > > > > > > > > Rashi,the longitudinal identity and Rasmi has no

> > > > > > > > > role to play.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > This is enough for any studen to understand what

> > > > > > > > > is what.Moreover

> > > > > > > > > > > shri Santhanam has categorically stated (for

> > > > > > > > > those who are still

> > > > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > > > clear) that graha drishti is beyond my

> > > > > > > > > understanding in Varga

> > > > > > > > > Chakras.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Thus i will not comment any more on Late

> > > > > > > > > Santhanams comment.There

> > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > > nothing more to add.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

[Guest guest]

Members,

 

what one sees is light emitted by the Graha and if we have to go by

reflection we go back to astronomy not Jyotishya.

 

all Grahas have been given devatas, adhidevatas why if it is mere reflected

sun light?

 

 

its the perception and u can see these concepts in Purusha suktam and if we

say reflected bodies alone then we can restrict our reading to Sun alone r

we doing so ? no

 

astronomy is different Jyotishya is different look similar to a certain

extent NO LITERAL meaning must be or can be given is what I said in the 1st

post on the reply

 

but now I must end this here and those who wish to continue on this can

 

 

Prashant

 

 

 

On 7/28/07, Tarun <tarun.virgo wrote:

>

> Dear Satya ji / Prashant ji,

>

> As Prashant ji has written Planets Emanate lights..

>

> i would like to correct him that planets only REFLECT light.

>

> because source of light in Galaxy is sun.

> and the planets reflect particular colour i.e. Yellow by Jupiter,

> Red by mars and so on.

>

> So i guess just little interpretation in sanskrit can lead to Change

> in the real meaning.

>

> sorry to jump in this mail.

>

> regards

>

> Tarun

>

> <%40>,

> " Satya Sai Kolachina "

>

> <skolachi wrote:

> >

> > Dear Prashant,

> >

> > There are other questions also I raised, which you did not seem to

> > attempt here.

> > But I still appreciate your attempt to get the essense of any

> > subject and then comparison may make sense between subjects; this

> is

> > what I was trying to convey to the people when they are looking for

> > every thing in black and white, when they look into Vedic

> astrology.

> > Our knowledge on both astronomy and vedic astrology is too little

> to

> > make such a comparison.

> >

> > If one looks for astronomical calculations to find aspects in varga

> > charts; they may not find one today. Of course, it doesn't mean

> that

> > those great astrologers of yester years have done blunder using

> > these charts.

> >

> > In the name of research we cannot dismiss or reject everything that

> > we cannot understand.

> >

> > I will narrate an incident here.

> >

> > One person used to argue that 'whatever he doesn't see, he cannot

> > believe in it; he says that he doesn't believe in existence of GOD

> > as he cannot see him'.

> > Then I asked him showing through the window 'what is behind that

> > building?'

> > He said 'there is a lake behind that building'.

> > Then I told him, based on his own argument 'I do not believe that

> > there is a lake, since I cannot see it'.

> > Then he said, 'If you go there you will see the lake'.

> > Then I said 'Right. You got the right answer for your problem. If I

> > take extra efforts of going there, then I can see the lake.

> > Similarly if you put extra efforts to know GOD, you will know him

> > too'. He agreed to my answer.

> >

> > Similarly, if we put extra efforts in understanding our Vedic

> > astrology, there are pearls underneath it. Instead, if we keep

> > arguing that I don't believe since the mathematics doesn't support

> > it; no one can help that person. I said earlier. Vedic astrology is

> > DIVINE SCIENCE; not just a simple science. One should have a divine

> > outlook to understand this subject.

> >

> > Thanks for sharing your views,

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> >

> > <%40>,

> " astro desk "

> > <astro.prashantkumar@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Satya

> > >

> > > for a start I wanted to limit myself to this part alone good u

> put

> > it again

> > > separately.

> > >

> > > Well most of sanskrit terms can't find the right equivalent of

> > English names

> > > like Dharma, Karma, Shrama, Yoga, etc all have different meanings

> > in a

> > > particular context still we can max bring a closer English word

> > not the

> > > intended meaning in that situation as languages born from

> Sanskrit

> > can

> > > picturise them

> > >

> > > likewise Graha is not a planet per se so we can't that in terms of

> > > astronomical planet at least

> > > in the same Vein Ravi is a star in astronomy inst it is it not

> > diminishing

> > > its might when we call it a Planet

> > >

> > > Graha in Sanskrit and for astrological reasoning is all light

> > emanating

> > > bodies, this is how some astral bodies like Gulika, Indra chapa,

> > mandi etc

> > > are also in the list [upgrahas again not the satelite perse] all

> > light

> > > emanating bodies and light need not be from the known visual

> > spectrum leave

> > > alone visible light spectrum and the ultra violet and infra red

> > bands of

> > > light. as it is Jyotshya- a subject of Light is the right word

> and

> > astrology

> > > is a weaker word for it in comparison.

> > >

> > > Our shastras talk of 14 lokas again must not be loosely confused

> > with worlds

> > > can mean 14 strata where life is possible in any form for an

> > insect to a

> > > mammal organic and inorganic matter etc.

> > >

> > > my attn was more on so called scientific labels we must not

> reduce

> > it to

> > > them but get the essence of them

> > > we must not *Missing the wood for the trees*.

> > >

> > > Personally I would like to contribute more on reading charts as

> it

> > helps

> > > people than this debates which may go in circles. in the name of

> > scienticif

> > > bent of mind we can't turn the tables upside down

> > > the systems laid by our rishis are well founded and cant last

> any

> > more

> > > thousand of years all we need is to understand its essence and

> > tune it for

> > > the times we live in

> > >

> > > just as the Wheel the corner stone of civilisation has been, a

> > conveyance

> > > that can start from a bullock cart to a space shuttle are all

> > still on

> > > wheels it is mere adaptation that is needed. we can't invent any

> > other wheel

> > > form than a circle isn't it? the propellants can be different/

> > >

> > >

> > > Best wishes

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > On 7/27/07, Satya Sai Kolachina <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Small correction.

> > > >

> > > > Please read as : I am sure that Rahu and Kethu are planets

> > according

> > > > to Vedic astrology.

> > > >

> > > > I typed a 'not' as a typographical error.

> > > >

> > > > Satya

> > > >

> > > >

<%40><%

> > 40>,

> > > > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > As I am fedup with the hypocricy of those who look for 100%

> > > > > paralance of astronomical evidence for aspects in Amsa

> charts,

> > I

> > > > am

> > > > > putting these questions straight to those people. Since you

> > have

> > > > > scientific bent of mind, I appreciate it, and I, as a simple

> > > > > astrologer, am looking for answers for these very simple

> > questions

> > > > > that bother me.

> > > > > This mail is not for those who have the habit of skipping

> > > > > inconvenient questions, or diverting the attention of the

> > public.

> > > > >

> > > > > What is the astronomical basis of calling Jupiter as the

> > Vaamana

> > > > > incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > > > > What is the astronomical basis of calling Angaaraka (Mangal)

> > > > calling

> > > > > as Nrisimha incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

> > > > > (same question repeated for all the incarnations of Lord

> > Vishnu.

> > > > > Similarly what is astronomical basis of assigning castes to

> > these

> > > > > planets?

> > > > > Rahu and Kethu are NOT PLANETS according to ASTRONOMY; I am

> not

> > > > sure

> > > > > they are planets according to VEDIC ASTROLOGY.

> > > > > There are many other questions. At least these questions are

> > from

> > > > > the first couple of chapters of BPHS. I am not even going into

> > > > > depths of BPHS, as it is not required for these simple

> > questions.

> > > > > These form part of the basis for our predictions.

> > > > >

> > > > > I do not need answers with respect to BPHS or any of our

> > classics,

> > > > > since they already support these concepts.

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards,

> > > > > Satya S Kolachina

> > > > > --- In

<%40><%

> > 40>,

> > > > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Astronomically Rahu and Kethu are only Nodes of moon; but

> > they

> > > > > have

> > > > > > been given the status of plaents by our Maha munis. What I

> > was

> > > > > > saying is do not bring 100% astronomical paralance into

> vedic

> > > > > > astrology, as it fails in several areas.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I hope you can understand English and hence understand what

> > I am

> > > > > > saying here.

> > > > > > Satya

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In

<%40><%

> > 40>,

> > > > " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Satya ji

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > You are talking in the language of Yukthi Vaadis,who does

> > not

> > > > > know

> > > > > > > astrology but keep on critizing it.But you are not like

> > > > that.You

> > > > > > are

> > > > > > > well aversed in astrology.You may not talk in that

> fashion.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 1)Rahu & Ketu are astronomical points -Nodes of Moon -

> > > > > > > Philosophically they are the intersection of Atma-Mana

> > padha.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 2)Sun and Moon -They are considered as ''Grahas'' by

> > > > > > > Mahamunis.Planet is an English term.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Gola ,Ganita,Hora - Mahamunis did not devise anything for

> > > > > > fun.There

> > > > > > > is a strong basis.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Similarly the rules for aspect and their evaluations can

> be

> > > > > > > objectively measured in a mathematical fashion.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In

<%40><%

> > 40>,

> > > > " Satya Sai Kolachina "

> > > > > > > <skolachi@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Sri Kursija,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define 9 planets as incarnations of

> > Lord

> > > > > > Vishnu.

> > > > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define Rahu and Kethu as planets.

> Even

> > Sun

> > > > > and

> > > > > > > Moon

> > > > > > > > are not planets astronomically.

> > > > > > > > Astronomy doesn't define planets into different castes

> > like

> > > > > > > Brahmin,

> > > > > > > > Khathriya, Vaishya and Sudra etc. THere are many things

> > you

> > > > > > cannot

> > > > > > > > get from astronomy. Our seers gave Vedic astrology

> > thousands

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > years

> > > > > > > > ago, whereas the science of astronomy developed much

> > later.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > If you start talking in strict astronomical sense,

> > > > Vedic/Hindu

> > > > > > > > astrology doesn't fit in there. The closest

> > approximation to

> > > > > > > > astronomy is only the Western astrology; which some

> > people

> > > > > > follow.

> > > > > > > > Let us not be hypocritical. If we follow Vedic

> astrology,

> > > > let

> > > > > us

> > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > feel bad to take the vedic astrology concepts as they

> > are.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Vedic astrology is more than science; it is divine

> > science.

> > > > > You

> > > > > > do

> > > > > > > > not have to accept what I say. For that matter no one

> > has to

> > > > > > > accept

> > > > > > > > what I say. But, when you try to equate something, do

> > not do

> > > > > it

> > > > > > > > selectively.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > There is a concept of divinity superimposed over the

> > > > > > astronomical

> > > > > > > > facts; some concepts seem to be apparently known to us;

> > > > there

> > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > many concepts not known or lost in the past centuries.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Regards,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Satya S Kolachina

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In

<%40>

> <%

> > 40>,

> > > > " S.C. Kursija "

> > > > > <sckursija@>

> > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Respected members of the forum,

> > > > > > > > > I tried my best to keep away from this endless

> > > > > > > > > discussion but not with out poin. It has got its own

> > > > > > > > > merits. But the discussion is turning into criticism

> > > > > > > > > and trying to prove that other is worng. This is not a

> > > > > > > > > healthy way of discussion.

> > > > > > > > > Up till now I have not seen any member Who discuss

> > > > > > > > > the aspect. Why we have taken aspect in astrology? The

> > > > > > > > > aspect refers to an angular distance

> > > > > > > > > between two celestial bodies measured along the

> > > > > > > > > ecliptic. So all terms used in astrology are based on

> > > > > > > > > astronomy. If we take into consideration the

> > > > > > > > > definition of aspect in astronomy, there will not be

> > > > > > > > > any confusion whether we should use aspect in varga or

> > > > > > > > > not. The varga are not configuration of the planets on

> > > > > > > > > the bases of astronomy. We have created varga to look

> > > > > > > > > deep into the different aspects of life. The rashi

> > > > > > > > > chart is the map of the planets at the time of birth.

> > > > > > > > > It the nature position of the planets. The varga are

> > > > > > > > > the creation of astrologers not the nature or the

> > > > > > > > > Universe.Though Astrology is based on astronomy and

> > > > > > > > > mathematic, but not whimsical. It is a science.So

> > > > > > > > > aspect should not be seen in vargas.If any how we find

> > > > > > > > > out that one or two shlokas in one classic in favor of

> > > > > > > > > use of aspects in varga, it does not prove that aspect

> > > > > > > > > should be used in vergas.Why other classics are

> > > > > > > > > silent. Does astronomy allows it? If astronomy does

> > > > > > > > > not allows the same, we should reject the same

> > > > > > > > > immediately. The astrology is based on astronomy. The

> > > > > > > > > astronomy is not based on astrology. We have converted

> > > > > > > > > astronomy into the astrology for the benefit of human

> > > > > > > > > kind and universe to understand the future. Respect

> > > > > > > > > the astronomy not any person who ever he may be.The

> > > > > > > > > astrologers have developed the habit of giving

> > > > > > > > > explanation when event has taken place and try to fit

> > > > > > > > > the event in astrology, but does not improve himself

> > > > > > > > > and astrology. I have repeatedly requested the indian

> > > > > > > > > astronomers and mathematicians to modify and rectify

> > > > > > > > > the data of the astrology according to the present

> > > > > > > > > position of the planets and point of equinox so that

> > > > > > > > > we may be able to predict earth quake,pattern of rain

> > > > > > > > > and seasons, say mundane events.

> > > > > > > > > I do not want to criticise any one. If my words have

> > > > > > > > > hurt any body, I feel sorry for the same.

> > > > > > > > > --- vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep@>

> > > > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Dear Prafulla ji

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > This is really painful.You are really testing

> > > > > > > > > > patience.How many times

> > > > > > > > > > i have to tell you this.Should i bring the mail in

> > > > > > > > > > which i have

> > > > > > > > > > answered the same question to you.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I clealry said,since he considered Varga charts -he

> > > > > > > > > > could notexplain

> > > > > > > > > > Lagna shadvargake shloka.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Do you think others in this goup are fools.Do you

> > > > > > > > > > think this tactic

> > > > > > > > > > will work.It is there in the archives ,about what i

> > > > > > > > > > have said.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > In

<%40>

> <%

> > 40>,

> > > > " Prafulla Gang "

> > > > > > > > > > <jyotish@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep ji

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Do you agree with Shri Santhanam's conviction of

> > > > > > > > > > varga charts? I am

> > > > > > > > > > > repeatedly questioning your misquote, as he even

> > > > > > > > > > used aspects. You

> > > > > > > > > > > should not refer himn selectively. You do agree

> > > > > > > > > > with his 10th line

> > > > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > > the poem (i.e. aspects) , So I presume - you agree

> > > > > > > > > > with first 9

> > > > > > > > > > lines

> > > > > > > > > > > also (i.e. varga chakra, the yogas there, houses

> > > > > > > > > > there and so son).

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > regards / Prafulla

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > --- In

<%40>

> <%

> > 40>

> > > > ,

> > > > > > > > > > " vijayadas_pradeep "

> > > > > > > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Respected members

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Grahasphuta Drishti Kadhanadhyaya in BPHS talks

> > > > > > > > > > about the drishti

> > > > > > > > > > > > other than Rashi drishti mentioned in earlier

> > > > > > > > > > chapter.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Here sage says,apart from the common or

> > > > > > > > > > ordinary(Samanya) way of

> > > > > > > > > > > > seeing raha drshti we can evaluate graha drishti

> > > > > > > > > > based on

> > > > > > > > > > longitude.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Then sage describes how the strength of Graha

> > > > > > > > > > drishtis can be

> > > > > > > > > > > > evaluated.As Jupiter ,Mars and Saturn has

> > > > > > > > > > special aspects there

> > > > > > > > > > are

> > > > > > > > > > > > special rules mentioned to evaluate their

> > > > > > > > > > strength as well.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > So being the case,Shri Santhanam or any other

> > > > > > > > > > astrologer ,translator

> > > > > > > > > > > > cannot have a different view.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Now as varga placements are purely based on

> > > > > > > > > > varga lordship within

> > > > > > > > > > a

> > > > > > > > > > > > Rashi,the longitudinal identity and Rasmi has no

> > > > > > > > > > role to play.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > This is enough for any studen to understand what

> > > > > > > > > > is what.Moreover

> > > > > > > > > > > > shri Santhanam has categorically stated (for

> > > > > > > > > > those who are still

> > > > > > > > > > not

> > > > > > > > > > > > clear) that graha drishti is beyond my

> > > > > > > > > > understanding in Varga

> > > > > > > > > > Chakras.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Thus i will not comment any more on Late

> > > > > > > > > > Santhanams comment.There

> > > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > > > nothing more to add.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Regds

> > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >