Guest guest Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 Dear Saji Bhaskaranji, Every astrologer formulates a methodology, which evolves over time, based on the success rate of predictions. While we all respect the classics and the maha rishis that have given us the classics, we do not attempt to blindly attempt majority of these rules, and also we tend not to accept the logic presented by other astrologers, unless it fits within our methodoloy. Hence I give due respect to Sri Narasimhaji and his methodology; but we don't have to take every step in that methodology as applicable to us. e.g., I also look into D10 or D12 etc., but not as much as Sri Narasimhaji depends. I try to extract as much info as I can, from the Rasi and Navamsa charts alone. Take the navamsa dispositor of any planet in Rasi chart - see how this planet is disposed in the Rasi chart again; this principle works in general for any Bhava owned by the specific planet that we started with; not only for career. Navamsa reveals a lot more detail than just marriage, as many people consider. The other divisional charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, triplets and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the accuracy of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. Let us recollect what was told by great astrologers like Sri KN Rao say - take a principle from classics, apply it to a number of horoscopes and only after you are satisfied with the results, you can depend on that principle. It is a painful experience, but one gains speed and accuracy over time. Best regards, Satya Sai Kolachina , " Saaji Bhaskaran " <saajik wrote: > > Dear Narasimha ji, > > <<< > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used navamsa as a > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, navamsa is > also > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a chart, > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I would be > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > >>> > > > Thought of answering this question. The use of Navamsa chart along > with Rasi was there atleast from the period of the great Varahamihira > while no other text which I read, except BPHS give the methods you > talk about. Shloka 6 of Brihat Jataka, " grahaamshakapaah " , the > commentators quote this as Navamsa equals with Rasi chart. > Why 'amsha' only Navamsa is, its Navamsa that Varahamihira gave more > importance in the same shloka not any other amsas. > > There is another shloka " balayogaal phalamamsakarkshayoh " also > showing the same. > > In Brihat Jataka(and other classics too), its navamsa that gains > equal importance with Rasi. There are many examples. In BPHS also its > given importance while Maharshi said to look into various things from > the divisions as you mentioned. > > Like Satya Sai ji's, my experience also same. In some cases I saw the > profession clearly shown with Dasamsa while in some cases Dasamsa was > not giving a straight solution but it was evident in Rasi chart. For > example you have my chart, what profession does D10 give? I am a Cost > Accountant which is more seen with Sun-Mer in the 4th/10th viz > Lagna/Moon. > > BTW, I respect your logic of giving more importance to the teachings > of Maharshi. But at the same time, it pains me when you simply reject > Varahamihira or Satyacharya for want of " logic " and at the same time > promote many other research which are not from Maharshis. > > Best regards, > > Saaji Bhaskaran > > > , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > Namaste Satish, > > > > > I am not sure parashar taught divisional charts. He > > > taught divisions. To use them as divisional charts is > > > a modern invention and jury is still out on this one. > > > > This is the second time here that I am seeing the phrase " a modern > > invention " applied to divisional charts. Let me ask a very simple > and > > obvious question. > > > > If this is " a modern invention " , who made this invention and when > > (atleast in what timeframe)? > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used navamsa as a > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, navamsa is > also > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a chart, > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I would be > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > Best regards, > > Narasimha > > -------------------------------- - > > Do Ganapathi Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam > > Spirituality: > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > > -------------------------------- - > > > > , SPK <aquaris_rising@> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am not sure parashar taught divisional charts. He > > > taught divisions. To use them as divisional charts is > > > a modern invention and jury is still out on this one. > > > People have pointed to one verse to say parashar > > > sanctionbs divisional charts. But the same shloka can > > > be interpreted to mean see the division in Rashi > > > chart. > > > > > > Vijaydas is wrting a paper on this. Members may look > > > in the archives of last year to find the discussion. > > > There is no explicit sanction to use divisions as > > > separate charts. This has added the most confusion to > > > jyotish and it basically a tool to explain away KNOWN > > > things. As with diviosional charts every planet > > > becomes a candidate to confer result of each and every > > > house. > > > > > > Satish > > > --- " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > Namaste Pradeep ji, > > > > > > > > > Our asumption that rashi and navamsha are simple > > > > and our haste and > > > > > eagerness in answering all questions,will result > > > > in failure to see > > > > > what is to be seen.Treading slowly and persevering > > > > to understand the > > > > > depth of rashi chakra can reveal all in the due > > > > course. > > > > > > > > The issue is not that rasi and navamsa chart are > > > > " simple " or one needs to " tread slowly " . The issue > > > > is whether there is enough depth and degrees of > > > > freedom in rasi and navamsa charts. The issue is > > > > that lagna and all planets remain in the same > > > > positions in rasi and navamsa charts for 14 minutes > > > > on average. We have cases of twins and triplets born > > > > minutes apart, who share the same rasi and navamsa > > > > charts but have totally different personalities and > > > > lives. Even if you learn the interpretation of rasi > > > > and navamsa charts for 100 years or even 100 lives, > > > > the fact remains that they do not have enough > > > > degrees of freedom. > > > > > > > > In fact, many old astrologers use only rasi chart, > > > > which remains constant for 2 hours. From the point > > > > of view of degrees of freedom, this is plain silly. > > > > > > > > One can see whatever one wants to see in a cloud. > > > > One may see a house in a cloud on one occasion and > > > > may see a tree in the very same cloud on another > > > > occasion. But that is an art then and not a science. > > > > If an astrologer with good intuition has the ability > > > > to see two or three totally different fortunes from > > > > the same rasi chart for twins or triplets, I respect > > > > the ability but it is an art and not a science. > > > > > > > > If astrology aspires to be a science, the only way > > > > is to understand the teachings of Parasara correctly > > > > and decipher the divisional charts etc. > > > > > > > > Divisional charts are not some " new thing " . They > > > > were taught by Parasara about 5,000 years ago and > > > > have been used by several traditions even during the > > > > last few centuries when rasi chart based predictions > > > > became common in the mainstream. > > > > > > > > Anyway, if you believe that rasi chart is enough for > > > > everything, please feel free to use that approach > > > > and good luck! > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > ------------------------------ --- > > > > Do Ganapathi Homam Yourself: > > > > http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam > > > > Spirituality: > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): > > > > http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): > > > > http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: > > > > http://www.SriJagannath.org > > > > > > > ------------------------------ --- > > > > > > > > , > > > > " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Narasimha ji > > > > > > > > > > I am pasting again what Inderjit has mentioned - > > > > > > > Before proceeding to the Divisions had you > > > > done justice with > > > > > >>Rashi? > > > > > The reason for the repetition is mentioned below. > > > > > > > > > > In another mail you had mentioned that elder > > > > astrologers where able > > > > > to predict with the help of rashi and navamsha > > > > alone by virtue of > > > > > intution. > > > > > > > > > > Our asumption that rashi and navamsha are simple > > > > and our haste and > > > > > eagerness in answering all questions,will result > > > > in failure to see > > > > > what is to be seen.Treading slowly and persevering > > > > to understand the > > > > > depth of rashi chakra can reveal all in the due > > > > course. > > > > > > > > > > It is not intution or pure luck that helped those > > > > simple souls of > > > > > yesteryears to predict.Deep understanding ,to the > > > > core about a > > > > > bhavanatha and relevant karakas and ability in > > > > measuring their > > > > > strength and their vargamsha sambandhas, as > > > > advised by the venerated > > > > > sages and strictly abiding to those fundamentals, > > > > were the reason. > > > > > > > > > > It takes many janmas of tapas to understand the > > > > essence.I agree that > > > > > in this era of techincal and gross logic we are > > > > always looking for > > > > > magical formulas.However my personal view is > > > > Jyotisha Mahashastra is > > > > > a HOLISTIC and a fully evolved science.We may > > > > concentrate on our > > > > > evolution as compared to modifying jyotish. > > > > > > > > > > I respect your views and your contribution towards > > > > Jyotish through > > > > > the selfless software.May Lord bless you. > > > > > > > > > > However i have disagreement regarding your chart > > > > analysis.As > > > > > K.N.Raoji says - Concentrate on dasha and > > > > antardasha alone for many > > > > > years.Understanding Vimshothari alone will take a > > > > janma. > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Narasimha > > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Inder Jit ji, > > > > > > > > > > > > > <I do believe that rasi, navamsa and vimsamsa > > > > charts enable us to > > > > > get a good > > > > > > > idea of how much spiritual progress one makes > > > > and when. According > > > > > to > > > > > > > Parasara, vimsamsa is the chart of spiritual > > > > progress.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Before proceeding to the Divisions had you > > > > done justice with > > > > > Rashi? > > > > > > > > > > > > Easy easy - I did mention rasi also above. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Rasi chart is like the master projection of the > > > > plans of all the > > > > > storeys in a sixteen storey building onto the > > > > ground floor. Of > > > > > course, the projection of each storey is contained > > > > in it, but they > > > > > are all mixed up. Does an affliction to the 4th > > > > house show a problem > > > > > to mother, happiness, vehicles, education, heart, > > > > residence, wife's > > > > > career, younger brother's wealth or son's losses? > > > > > > > > > > > > Each divisional chart is like the projection of > > > > the plan of a > > > > > single storey in the building. > > > > > > > > > > > > > And what is spiritual? Doing Homa and reciting > > > > Mantra is Spritual? > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) Why are you asking me and why are you > > > > bringing up homa? > > > > > > > > > > > > Spiritual means a clear understanding of the > > > > *essence* of Veda and > > > > > Upanishads and imbibing it in one's thoughts and > > > > actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > All religions, rituals and sadhanas are > > > > different paths to this. > > > > > One may make spiritual progress through recital of > > > > a mantra, one may > > > > > make it through homa/havan, one may make it > > > > through devotion and > > > > > surrender to a deity, one may make it through just > > > > contemplation and > > > > > knowledge, one may make it through service to > > > > others with discipline > > > > > and devotion, one may make it through hatha yoga, > > > > and so on. There > > > > > are many paths. Also, spiritual progress is not > > > > restricted to a > > > > > specific religion. There have been people from > > > > many regions of the > > > > > world and many religions, who demonstrated a clear > > > > understanding the > > > > > essence of Veda and Upanishads in their actions > > > > (though they may have > > > > > never read those scriptures). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Todays spiritual is more like a blind man > > > > leading to the groups > > > > > of blind > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________ _ > ______________ > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and > > > know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now. > > http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 Namaste Satya Sai garu, > The other divisional > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, triplets > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the accuracy > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. Well, in a case where twins or triplets share the same rasi and navamsa and yet have different personalities and fortunes, we know that rasi and navamsa are not sufficient and there are other finer astro-parameters that explain their differences. That brings up interesting and troublesome questions. In the chart of a person with no twins or triplets, do you think those finer astro-parameters are no longer relevant? Why? In other words, can there be many people having different fortunes but sharing the same rasi and navamsa as the person you are studying? Is a significant variation in fortune possible within a window of 14 minutes where rasi and navamsa are constant? If an accurate birthtime is key to successful prediction in the case of twins and triplets, is it not so in a normal chart? Best regards, Narasimha Do Ganapathi Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam Spirituality: Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org , " Satya Sai Kolachina " <skolachi wrote: > > Dear Saji Bhaskaranji, > > Every astrologer formulates a methodology, which evolves over time, > based on the success rate of predictions. While we all respect the > classics and the maha rishis that have given us the classics, we do > not attempt to blindly attempt majority of these rules, and also we > tend not to accept the logic presented by other astrologers, unless > it fits within our methodoloy. Hence I give due respect to Sri > Narasimhaji and his methodology; but we don't have to take every > step in that methodology as applicable to us. e.g., I also look into > D10 or D12 etc., but not as much as Sri Narasimhaji depends. I try > to extract as much info as I can, from the Rasi and Navamsa charts > alone. Take the navamsa dispositor of any planet in Rasi chart - see > how this planet is disposed in the Rasi chart again; this principle > works in general for any Bhava owned by the specific planet that we > started with; not only for career. Navamsa reveals a lot more detail > than just marriage, as many people consider. The other divisional > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, triplets > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the accuracy > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. > > Let us recollect what was told by great astrologers like Sri KN Rao > say - take a principle from classics, apply it to a number of > horoscopes and only after you are satisfied with the results, you > can depend on that principle. It is a painful experience, but one > gains speed and accuracy over time. > > Best regards, > Satya Sai Kolachina > > > , " Saaji Bhaskaran " <saajik@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Narasimha ji, > > > > <<< > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used navamsa > as a > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, navamsa is > > also > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > chart, > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I would be > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > >>> > > > > > > Thought of answering this question. The use of Navamsa chart along > > with Rasi was there atleast from the period of the great > Varahamihira > > while no other text which I read, except BPHS give the methods you > > talk about. Shloka 6 of Brihat Jataka, " grahaamshakapaah " , the > > commentators quote this as Navamsa equals with Rasi chart. > > Why 'amsha' only Navamsa is, its Navamsa that Varahamihira gave > more > > importance in the same shloka not any other amsas. > > > > There is another shloka " balayogaal phalamamsakarkshayoh " also > > showing the same. > > > > In Brihat Jataka(and other classics too), its navamsa that gains > > equal importance with Rasi. There are many examples. In BPHS also > its > > given importance while Maharshi said to look into various things > from > > the divisions as you mentioned. > > > > Like Satya Sai ji's, my experience also same. In some cases I saw > the > > profession clearly shown with Dasamsa while in some cases Dasamsa > was > > not giving a straight solution but it was evident in Rasi chart. > For > > example you have my chart, what profession does D10 give? I am a > Cost > > Accountant which is more seen with Sun-Mer in the 4th/10th viz > > Lagna/Moon. > > > > BTW, I respect your logic of giving more importance to the > teachings > > of Maharshi. But at the same time, it pains me when you simply > reject > > Varahamihira or Satyacharya for want of " logic " and at the same > time > > promote many other research which are not from Maharshis. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Saaji Bhaskaran > > > > > > , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste Satish, > > > > > > > I am not sure parashar taught divisional charts. He > > > > taught divisions. To use them as divisional charts is > > > > a modern invention and jury is still out on this one. > > > > > > This is the second time here that I am seeing the phrase " a > modern > > > invention " applied to divisional charts. Let me ask a very > simple > > and > > > obvious question. > > > > > > If this is " a modern invention " , who made this invention and when > > > (atleast in what timeframe)? > > > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used navamsa > as a > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, navamsa is > > also > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > chart, > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I would be > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Narasimha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2008 Report Share Posted April 15, 2008 Dear Sri Narasimha Rao garu, Namaste, Please see my answers here. 1. The finer details provided by D10 and other divisional charts will be useful whether it is the birth of a single person or twins or triplets, but within the context of Rasi chart only. All depends on the correctness of the birth time. 2. As I said in one of my earlier mails, The personality (not physical but mental outlook) of a person makes a profound influence in choosing one's career. It is also guided by one's Dharma or responsibilities that one is born with, which is evident from the Dharma trikona, and the planets influencing the dharma trikona and the dharmamsa (or navamsa). Hence without consulting Rasi and Navamsa, I do not consult the dasamsa to see one's career. Without this approach, even Dasamsa may mislead with many possibilities. Thus I consider Rasi as an overall chart, not just for physical appearance alone. 3. Even in Rasi chart, among the three -lagna, chandra lagna and surya lagna, the strongest one having profound influence on career. Take the strongest of these three lagnas and find the 10th house/lord from this lagna. 4. The main difference between what you explained as your approach (based on what you said earlier), and what I follow is that, you give an independent existence to the divisional charts, whereas I look into the divisional charts within the context of (or promise given by) the rasi chart. Divisional charts do not give anything on their own, if the rasi and navamsa charts do not indicate the same. For that matter, even the navamsa chart does not have independent existence; but it has equal importance along with rasi chart, in all matters of life. Rasi position of the navamsa dispositor of rasi 10th lord gives very good detail about one's karma and career; similarly rasi position of the navamsa dispositor of rasi 5th lord gives very good detail about one's children & intellectual faculties, and so on. We use rasi + navamsa + the relevant divisional chart to see clear detail of the specific area of life; for example, for career, I do not use (a) dasamsa alone or (b) Rasi + dasamsa alone; rather, I use Rasi + navamsa + dasamsa. The more and more divisional charts we include in the analysis, the more accurate the birth time should be. 5. Since you are a software professional, I can give an analogy with that terminology. It is something like we define the primary key of a table in a relational database to uniquely identify a row. Using Rasi, navamsa, dasamsa etc. together will help in making the key unique in identifying the individual from others who were born around the same timeframe. But, dasamsa alone will not give enough detail; hence it has no independent existence. I do support use of divisional charts, but within the context of the main rasi chart and navamsa chart only. Best regards, Satya Sai Kolachina , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr wrote: > > Namaste Satya Sai garu, > > > The other divisional > > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, triplets > > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the accuracy > > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. > > Well, in a case where twins or triplets share the same rasi and > navamsa and yet have different personalities and fortunes, we know > that rasi and navamsa are not sufficient and there are other finer > astro-parameters that explain their differences. That brings up > interesting and troublesome questions. > > In the chart of a person with no twins or triplets, do you think those > finer astro-parameters are no longer relevant? Why? > > In other words, can there be many people having different fortunes but > sharing the same rasi and navamsa as the person you are studying? Is a > significant variation in fortune possible within a window of 14 > minutes where rasi and navamsa are constant? > > If an accurate birthtime is key to successful prediction in the case > of twins and triplets, is it not so in a normal chart? > > Best regards, > Narasimha > > Do Ganapathi Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam > Spirituality: > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > > > , " Satya Sai Kolachina " > <skolachi@> wrote: > > > > Dear Saji Bhaskaranji, > > > > Every astrologer formulates a methodology, which evolves over time, > > based on the success rate of predictions. While we all respect the > > classics and the maha rishis that have given us the classics, we do > > not attempt to blindly attempt majority of these rules, and also we > > tend not to accept the logic presented by other astrologers, unless > > it fits within our methodoloy. Hence I give due respect to Sri > > Narasimhaji and his methodology; but we don't have to take every > > step in that methodology as applicable to us. e.g., I also look into > > D10 or D12 etc., but not as much as Sri Narasimhaji depends. I try > > to extract as much info as I can, from the Rasi and Navamsa charts > > alone. Take the navamsa dispositor of any planet in Rasi chart - see > > how this planet is disposed in the Rasi chart again; this principle > > works in general for any Bhava owned by the specific planet that we > > started with; not only for career. Navamsa reveals a lot more detail > > than just marriage, as many people consider. The other divisional > > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, triplets > > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the accuracy > > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. > > > > Let us recollect what was told by great astrologers like Sri KN Rao > > say - take a principle from classics, apply it to a number of > > horoscopes and only after you are satisfied with the results, you > > can depend on that principle. It is a painful experience, but one > > gains speed and accuracy over time. > > > > Best regards, > > Satya Sai Kolachina > > > > > > , " Saaji Bhaskaran " <saajik@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Narasimha ji, > > > > > > <<< > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used navamsa > > as a > > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, navamsa is > > > also > > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > > chart, > > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I would be > > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Thought of answering this question. The use of Navamsa chart along > > > with Rasi was there atleast from the period of the great > > Varahamihira > > > while no other text which I read, except BPHS give the methods you > > > talk about. Shloka 6 of Brihat Jataka, " grahaamshakapaah " , the > > > commentators quote this as Navamsa equals with Rasi chart. > > > Why 'amsha' only Navamsa is, its Navamsa that Varahamihira gave > > more > > > importance in the same shloka not any other amsas. > > > > > > There is another shloka " balayogaal phalamamsakarkshayoh " also > > > showing the same. > > > > > > In Brihat Jataka(and other classics too), its navamsa that gains > > > equal importance with Rasi. There are many examples. In BPHS also > > its > > > given importance while Maharshi said to look into various things > > from > > > the divisions as you mentioned. > > > > > > Like Satya Sai ji's, my experience also same. In some cases I saw > > the > > > profession clearly shown with Dasamsa while in some cases Dasamsa > > was > > > not giving a straight solution but it was evident in Rasi chart. > > For > > > example you have my chart, what profession does D10 give? I am a > > Cost > > > Accountant which is more seen with Sun-Mer in the 4th/10th viz > > > Lagna/Moon. > > > > > > BTW, I respect your logic of giving more importance to the > > teachings > > > of Maharshi. But at the same time, it pains me when you simply > > reject > > > Varahamihira or Satyacharya for want of " logic " and at the same > > time > > > promote many other research which are not from Maharshis. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Saaji Bhaskaran > > > > > > > > > , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Namaste Satish, > > > > > > > > > I am not sure parashar taught divisional charts. He > > > > > taught divisions. To use them as divisional charts is > > > > > a modern invention and jury is still out on this one. > > > > > > > > This is the second time here that I am seeing the phrase " a > > modern > > > > invention " applied to divisional charts. Let me ask a very > > simple > > > and > > > > obvious question. > > > > > > > > If this is " a modern invention " , who made this invention and when > > > > (atleast in what timeframe)? > > > > > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used navamsa > > as a > > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, navamsa is > > > also > > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > > chart, > > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I would be > > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Narasimha > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Dear Satya Sai ji / Narasimha ji, I too follow the methods mentioned by Satya Sai ji, but most times I dont use other divisions at all. I am based in UAE that too most colleagues are Egyptians and I dont have much contacts, so the scope of seeing charts also very limited. Regarding Twins or Triplets there is another point. Prashna Marga says that if the Prashna shows a better chart than Jataka, then one must know that the good karmas of present birth modified Jataka and vice versa. Point 2, A horoscope results can be modified by association with other persons of powerful horoscopes. All suggest homa, japa to mitigate the bad results or for prosperity. The stories related to astrologers in Kerala show even death or highest sort of diseases cured with remedies. So, the correct method of seeing a horoscope is along side a Prashna on the query. It can answer all questions evenif both horos(evenif shashtiamsa) are same. If based on Jataka alone, Rasi-Navamsa dont allow much freedom. Astrology is based on law of Karma and so I say astrology is a science and art. So far I couldn't understand the logic of saying astrology is science. Best regards, Saaji Bhaskaran , " Satya Sai Kolachina " <skolachi wrote: > > Dear Sri Narasimha Rao garu, Namaste, > > Please see my answers here. > 1. The finer details provided by D10 and other divisional charts > will be useful whether it is the birth of a single person or twins > or triplets, but within the context of Rasi chart only. All depends > on the correctness of the birth time. > > 2. As I said in one of my earlier mails, The personality (not > physical but mental outlook) of a person makes a profound influence > in choosing one's career. It is also guided by one's Dharma or > responsibilities that one is born with, which is evident from the > Dharma trikona, and the planets influencing the dharma trikona and > the dharmamsa (or navamsa). Hence without consulting Rasi and > Navamsa, I do not consult the dasamsa to see one's career. Without > this approach, even Dasamsa may mislead with many possibilities. > Thus I consider Rasi as an overall chart, not just for physical > appearance alone. > > 3. Even in Rasi chart, among the three -lagna, chandra lagna and > surya lagna, the strongest one having profound influence on career. > Take the strongest of these three lagnas and find the 10th > house/lord from this lagna. > > 4. The main difference between what you explained as your approach > (based on what you said earlier), and what I follow is that, you > give an independent existence to the divisional charts, whereas I > look into the divisional charts within the context of (or promise > given by) the rasi chart. Divisional charts do not give anything on > their own, if the rasi and navamsa charts do not indicate the same. > For that matter, even the navamsa chart does not have independent > existence; but it has equal importance along with rasi chart, in all > matters of life. Rasi position of the navamsa dispositor of rasi > 10th lord gives very good detail about one's karma and career; > similarly rasi position of the navamsa dispositor of rasi 5th lord > gives very good detail about one's children & intellectual > faculties, and so on. We use rasi + navamsa + the relevant > divisional chart to see clear detail of the specific area of life; > for example, for career, I do not use (a) dasamsa alone or (b) Rasi > + dasamsa alone; rather, I use Rasi + navamsa + dasamsa. The more > and more divisional charts we include in the analysis, the more > accurate the birth time should be. > > 5. Since you are a software professional, I can give an analogy with > that terminology. It is something like we define the primary key of > a table in a relational database to uniquely identify a row. Using > Rasi, navamsa, dasamsa etc. together will help in making the key > unique in identifying the individual from others who were born > around the same timeframe. But, dasamsa alone will not give enough > detail; hence it has no independent existence. I do support use of > divisional charts, but within the context of the main rasi chart and > navamsa chart only. > > Best regards, > Satya Sai Kolachina > > , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > Namaste Satya Sai garu, > > > > > The other divisional > > > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, > triplets > > > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the > accuracy > > > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. > > > > Well, in a case where twins or triplets share the same rasi and > > navamsa and yet have different personalities and fortunes, we know > > that rasi and navamsa are not sufficient and there are other finer > > astro-parameters that explain their differences. That brings up > > interesting and troublesome questions. > > > > In the chart of a person with no twins or triplets, do you think > those > > finer astro-parameters are no longer relevant? Why? > > > > In other words, can there be many people having different fortunes > but > > sharing the same rasi and navamsa as the person you are studying? > Is a > > significant variation in fortune possible within a window of 14 > > minutes where rasi and navamsa are constant? > > > > If an accurate birthtime is key to successful prediction in the > case > > of twins and triplets, is it not so in a normal chart? > > > > Best regards, > > Narasimha > > > > Do Ganapathi Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam > > Spirituality: > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > > > > > > , " Satya Sai Kolachina " > > <skolachi@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Saji Bhaskaranji, > > > > > > Every astrologer formulates a methodology, which evolves over > time, > > > based on the success rate of predictions. While we all respect > the > > > classics and the maha rishis that have given us the classics, we > do > > > not attempt to blindly attempt majority of these rules, and also > we > > > tend not to accept the logic presented by other astrologers, > unless > > > it fits within our methodoloy. Hence I give due respect to Sri > > > Narasimhaji and his methodology; but we don't have to take every > > > step in that methodology as applicable to us. e.g., I also look > into > > > D10 or D12 etc., but not as much as Sri Narasimhaji depends. I > try > > > to extract as much info as I can, from the Rasi and Navamsa > charts > > > alone. Take the navamsa dispositor of any planet in Rasi chart - > see > > > how this planet is disposed in the Rasi chart again; this > principle > > > works in general for any Bhava owned by the specific planet that > we > > > started with; not only for career. Navamsa reveals a lot more > detail > > > than just marriage, as many people consider. The other > divisional > > > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, > triplets > > > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the > accuracy > > > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. > > > > > > Let us recollect what was told by great astrologers like Sri KN > Rao > > > say - take a principle from classics, apply it to a number of > > > horoscopes and only after you are satisfied with the results, > you > > > can depend on that principle. It is a painful experience, but > one > > > gains speed and accuracy over time. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Satya Sai Kolachina > > > > > > > > > , " Saaji Bhaskaran " <saajik@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimha ji, > > > > > > > > <<< > > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used > navamsa > > > as a > > > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, > navamsa is > > > > also > > > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > > > chart, > > > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I > would be > > > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought of answering this question. The use of Navamsa chart > along > > > > with Rasi was there atleast from the period of the great > > > Varahamihira > > > > while no other text which I read, except BPHS give the methods > you > > > > talk about. Shloka 6 of Brihat Jataka, " grahaamshakapaah " , the > > > > commentators quote this as Navamsa equals with Rasi chart. > > > > Why 'amsha' only Navamsa is, its Navamsa that Varahamihira > gave > > > more > > > > importance in the same shloka not any other amsas. > > > > > > > > There is another shloka " balayogaal phalamamsakarkshayoh " also > > > > showing the same. > > > > > > > > In Brihat Jataka(and other classics too), its navamsa that > gains > > > > equal importance with Rasi. There are many examples. In BPHS > also > > > its > > > > given importance while Maharshi said to look into various > things > > > from > > > > the divisions as you mentioned. > > > > > > > > Like Satya Sai ji's, my experience also same. In some cases I > saw > > > the > > > > profession clearly shown with Dasamsa while in some cases > Dasamsa > > > was > > > > not giving a straight solution but it was evident in Rasi > chart. > > > For > > > > example you have my chart, what profession does D10 give? I am > a > > > Cost > > > > Accountant which is more seen with Sun-Mer in the 4th/10th viz > > > > Lagna/Moon. > > > > > > > > BTW, I respect your logic of giving more importance to the > > > teachings > > > > of Maharshi. But at the same time, it pains me when you simply > > > reject > > > > Varahamihira or Satyacharya for want of " logic " and at the > same > > > time > > > > promote many other research which are not from Maharshis. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > Saaji Bhaskaran > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Satish, > > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure parashar taught divisional charts. He > > > > > > taught divisions. To use them as divisional charts is > > > > > > a modern invention and jury is still out on this one. > > > > > > > > > > This is the second time here that I am seeing the phrase " a > > > modern > > > > > invention " applied to divisional charts. Let me ask a very > > > simple > > > > and > > > > > obvious question. > > > > > > > > > > If this is " a modern invention " , who made this invention and > when > > > > > (atleast in what timeframe)? > > > > > > > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used > navamsa > > > as a > > > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, > navamsa is > > > > also > > > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > > > chart, > > > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I > would be > > > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Narasimha > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2008 Report Share Posted April 16, 2008 Dear Saaji Bhaskaranji, > Astrology is based on law of Karma and so I say astrology is a > science and art. So far I couldn't understand the logic of saying > astrology is science. > Rather than art and science, I would classify it as Divine science; meaning, science with divinity. One who takes astrology as 'just science only', can go to a certain point and cannot see beyond that boundary. One who possesses divine blessing, can go beyond that boundary and see additional details. Only those astrologers who demonstrate strict discipline, tend to be spiritual (in real sense not to show-off), an attitude to serve the humanity etc., can develop spritual power and attain divine blessing. Many times we come across situations, where a particular planetary configuration should give certain result - but gives a different result, which cannot be understood by pure scientific-oriented approach. It is the divine spark that matters all. One may call it intuition. Well, intuition is one outcome of divine blessing. Regards, Satya Sai Kolachina , " Saaji Bhaskaran " <saajik wrote: > > Dear Satya Sai ji / Narasimha ji, > > I too follow the methods mentioned by Satya Sai ji, but most times I > dont use other divisions at all. I am based in UAE that too most > colleagues are Egyptians and I dont have much contacts, so the scope > of seeing charts also very limited. > > Regarding Twins or Triplets there is another point. Prashna Marga > says that if the Prashna shows a better chart than Jataka, then one > must know that the good karmas of present birth modified Jataka and > vice versa. Point 2, A horoscope results can be modified by > association with other persons of powerful horoscopes. All suggest > homa, japa to mitigate the bad results or for prosperity. The stories > related to astrologers in Kerala show even death or highest sort of > diseases cured with remedies. So, the correct method of seeing a > horoscope is along side a Prashna on the query. It can answer all > questions evenif both horos(evenif shashtiamsa) are same. If based on > Jataka alone, Rasi-Navamsa dont allow much freedom. > > Astrology is based on law of Karma and so I say astrology is a > science and art. So far I couldn't understand the logic of saying > astrology is science. > > Best regards, > > Saaji Bhaskaran > > > > , " Satya Sai Kolachina " > <skolachi@> wrote: > > > > Dear Sri Narasimha Rao garu, Namaste, > > > > Please see my answers here. > > 1. The finer details provided by D10 and other divisional charts > > will be useful whether it is the birth of a single person or twins > > or triplets, but within the context of Rasi chart only. All depends > > on the correctness of the birth time. > > > > 2. As I said in one of my earlier mails, The personality (not > > physical but mental outlook) of a person makes a profound influence > > in choosing one's career. It is also guided by one's Dharma or > > responsibilities that one is born with, which is evident from the > > Dharma trikona, and the planets influencing the dharma trikona and > > the dharmamsa (or navamsa). Hence without consulting Rasi and > > Navamsa, I do not consult the dasamsa to see one's career. Without > > this approach, even Dasamsa may mislead with many possibilities. > > Thus I consider Rasi as an overall chart, not just for physical > > appearance alone. > > > > 3. Even in Rasi chart, among the three -lagna, chandra lagna and > > surya lagna, the strongest one having profound influence on career. > > Take the strongest of these three lagnas and find the 10th > > house/lord from this lagna. > > > > 4. The main difference between what you explained as your approach > > (based on what you said earlier), and what I follow is that, you > > give an independent existence to the divisional charts, whereas I > > look into the divisional charts within the context of (or promise > > given by) the rasi chart. Divisional charts do not give anything on > > their own, if the rasi and navamsa charts do not indicate the same. > > For that matter, even the navamsa chart does not have independent > > existence; but it has equal importance along with rasi chart, in > all > > matters of life. Rasi position of the navamsa dispositor of rasi > > 10th lord gives very good detail about one's karma and career; > > similarly rasi position of the navamsa dispositor of rasi 5th lord > > gives very good detail about one's children & intellectual > > faculties, and so on. We use rasi + navamsa + the relevant > > divisional chart to see clear detail of the specific area of life; > > for example, for career, I do not use (a) dasamsa alone or (b) Rasi > > + dasamsa alone; rather, I use Rasi + navamsa + dasamsa. The more > > and more divisional charts we include in the analysis, the more > > accurate the birth time should be. > > > > 5. Since you are a software professional, I can give an analogy > with > > that terminology. It is something like we define the primary key of > > a table in a relational database to uniquely identify a row. Using > > Rasi, navamsa, dasamsa etc. together will help in making the key > > unique in identifying the individual from others who were born > > around the same timeframe. But, dasamsa alone will not give enough > > detail; hence it has no independent existence. I do support use of > > divisional charts, but within the context of the main rasi chart > and > > navamsa chart only. > > > > Best regards, > > Satya Sai Kolachina > > > > , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste Satya Sai garu, > > > > > > > The other divisional > > > > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, > > triplets > > > > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the > > accuracy > > > > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. > > > > > > Well, in a case where twins or triplets share the same rasi and > > > navamsa and yet have different personalities and fortunes, we know > > > that rasi and navamsa are not sufficient and there are other finer > > > astro-parameters that explain their differences. That brings up > > > interesting and troublesome questions. > > > > > > In the chart of a person with no twins or triplets, do you think > > those > > > finer astro-parameters are no longer relevant? Why? > > > > > > In other words, can there be many people having different > fortunes > > but > > > sharing the same rasi and navamsa as the person you are studying? > > Is a > > > significant variation in fortune possible within a window of 14 > > > minutes where rasi and navamsa are constant? > > > > > > If an accurate birthtime is key to successful prediction in the > > case > > > of twins and triplets, is it not so in a normal chart? > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Narasimha > > > ------------------------------ --- > > > Do Ganapathi Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam > > > Spirituality: > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > > > ------------------------------ --- > > > > > > , " Satya Sai Kolachina " > > > <skolachi@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Saji Bhaskaranji, > > > > > > > > Every astrologer formulates a methodology, which evolves over > > time, > > > > based on the success rate of predictions. While we all respect > > the > > > > classics and the maha rishis that have given us the classics, > we > > do > > > > not attempt to blindly attempt majority of these rules, and > also > > we > > > > tend not to accept the logic presented by other astrologers, > > unless > > > > it fits within our methodoloy. Hence I give due respect to Sri > > > > Narasimhaji and his methodology; but we don't have to take > every > > > > step in that methodology as applicable to us. e.g., I also look > > into > > > > D10 or D12 etc., but not as much as Sri Narasimhaji depends. I > > try > > > > to extract as much info as I can, from the Rasi and Navamsa > > charts > > > > alone. Take the navamsa dispositor of any planet in Rasi chart - > > > see > > > > how this planet is disposed in the Rasi chart again; this > > principle > > > > works in general for any Bhava owned by the specific planet > that > > we > > > > started with; not only for career. Navamsa reveals a lot more > > detail > > > > than just marriage, as many people consider. The other > > divisional > > > > charts will be helpful, certainly while analyzing twins, > > triplets > > > > and other similar complicated scenarios, in which case the > > accuracy > > > > of birth time becomes the key to successful prediction. > > > > > > > > Let us recollect what was told by great astrologers like Sri KN > > Rao > > > > say - take a principle from classics, apply it to a number of > > > > horoscopes and only after you are satisfied with the results, > > you > > > > can depend on that principle. It is a painful experience, but > > one > > > > gains speed and accuracy over time. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Satya Sai Kolachina > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Saaji Bhaskaran " > <saajik@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimha ji, > > > > > > > > > > <<< > > > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used > > navamsa > > > > as a > > > > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, > > navamsa is > > > > > also > > > > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > > > > chart, > > > > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I > > would be > > > > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought of answering this question. The use of Navamsa chart > > along > > > > > with Rasi was there atleast from the period of the great > > > > Varahamihira > > > > > while no other text which I read, except BPHS give the > methods > > you > > > > > talk about. Shloka 6 of Brihat Jataka, " grahaamshakapaah " , > the > > > > > commentators quote this as Navamsa equals with Rasi chart. > > > > > Why 'amsha' only Navamsa is, its Navamsa that Varahamihira > > gave > > > > more > > > > > importance in the same shloka not any other amsas. > > > > > > > > > > There is another shloka " balayogaal phalamamsakarkshayoh " > also > > > > > showing the same. > > > > > > > > > > In Brihat Jataka(and other classics too), its navamsa that > > gains > > > > > equal importance with Rasi. There are many examples. In BPHS > > also > > > > its > > > > > given importance while Maharshi said to look into various > > things > > > > from > > > > > the divisions as you mentioned. > > > > > > > > > > Like Satya Sai ji's, my experience also same. In some cases I > > saw > > > > the > > > > > profession clearly shown with Dasamsa while in some cases > > Dasamsa > > > > was > > > > > not giving a straight solution but it was evident in Rasi > > chart. > > > > For > > > > > example you have my chart, what profession does D10 give? I > am > > a > > > > Cost > > > > > Accountant which is more seen with Sun-Mer in the 4th/10th > viz > > > > > Lagna/Moon. > > > > > > > > > > BTW, I respect your logic of giving more importance to the > > > > teachings > > > > > of Maharshi. But at the same time, it pains me when you > simply > > > > reject > > > > > Varahamihira or Satyacharya for want of " logic " and at the > > same > > > > time > > > > > promote many other research which are not from Maharshis. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > Saaji Bhaskaran > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Narasimha Rao " <pvr@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Satish, > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure parashar taught divisional charts. He > > > > > > > taught divisions. To use them as divisional charts is > > > > > > > a modern invention and jury is still out on this one. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is the second time here that I am seeing the phrase " a > > > > modern > > > > > > invention " applied to divisional charts. Let me ask a very > > > > simple > > > > > and > > > > > > obvious question. > > > > > > > > > > > > If this is " a modern invention " , who made this invention > and > > when > > > > > > (atleast in what timeframe)? > > > > > > > > > > > > The followup question is: Do you know that nobody used > > navamsa > > > > as a > > > > > > chart before the date of this " invention " ? After all, > > navamsa is > > > > > also > > > > > > a divisional chart. If you disagree with using dasamsa as a > > > > chart, > > > > > > then you should disagree with using navamsa as a chart too. > > > > > > > > > > > > In case you accept navamsa as a chart but not dasamsa, I > > would be > > > > > > interested in hearing the logic. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > 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.