Rashi Drishti - Some Thoughts/Doubts

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Rath ji and respected members

Hope you are keeping good health with Grace.I have got the follwoing doubts on Rashi Drishti after reading a mail ,posted by Sreenadh ji(ancinet_indian_astrology).As you extensively use such drishtis,Kindly attend these questions whenever you find some time

1)What is the basis of Rashi Drishti 2)What makes(motive) Chara Rashis aspect Sthira3)Why do we omit the Rashis adjacent to the aspector (Does it mean a minimum angle is necessary for Drishti or we have some other reason)4)If Rashis involved in Rashi drishti are EMPTY - What kind of significance is there for such Drishtis - or rather ''How''5)Are Rashi drishtis Universally applicable - ie Are we supposed to understand Graha drishti & Rashi drishti in a different way or under the same umbrella.

(The point of Graha being animate and Rashi inanimate w.r to Graha drishti is understood)

Best wishesPradeep

[Guest guest]

|| Hare Rama Krishna ||

Dear Vijaydas-ji,

Namaskar. Without going into any possible disputes/arguments I would like to state that as a student who is still struggling with basics, I am also in the want of conceptual understanding of rasi aspects. My questions are similar to your first e-mail.

(1) Why Chara -rasis aspect (or have mutual control on each other with) sthira rasis and Dwisabhaba rasis aspect each other? Why not adjacent rasis?

(2) Why this aspect is based on chara-sthira-dwisabhaba classification of rasis and why not on other classifications viz. odd/even, odd-footed-even-footed-ness, udaya, rasi tattva (fiery, earthy etc).?

-- For example, out of the tattva classification, in each class there are three rasis, chara-sthira-disabhaba and in each class there are mutual rasi drishti's between two of the three rasis. Hence my idea that tattva can have a possible bearning. I do not know how.

(3) Does rasi aspect have anything to do with sambandhas of their lords (e.g. relation per planetary cabinet) ?

Best wishes,

Sourav

========================================================sohamsa , "vijayadas_pradeep" <vijayadas_pradeep wrote:>> Dear Sanjay ji> > Thanks a lot for your time.> Kindly see my replies.> > Warm regds> Pradeep> > If shri Rath is unable to answer i am requesting other learned members> like shri Sanjay Prabhakaran to comment on Rashi drishtis.> [s.Rath:] 'unable' is not the right word. It assumes too much. I told> you so many times that I don't have to answer which you cannot take for> some reason. Try 'would not like to answer' next time. It can start> changing things inside.> > Pradeep:''Unable'' was not having any specific intention.It can be lack> of time as well.Kindly understand.> > My strong feeling is Rashi drishtis are not to be used along with graha> drishtis.> Rashi dashas are not based on the nakshthra placement of moon and> progressions,rather that of Rashis.Grahas in chara rashis can influence> those in Sthira Rashis(chara has some reason to infleunce sthira and> vice-versa?).Similarly Grahas in Dwisabhava Rashis will influence those> in other dwisabhava rashis.> [s.Rath:] That is a wrong assumtion you have made. (1) Kalachakra dasa> is a rashi dasa based on the nakshatra placement of the Moon. Su dasa is> also a rashi dasa based on not only nakshatra placement of Moon but also> of Lagna degree. (2) statement in bold is a fact.> > 1)Though Kalachakra dasha has dasha orders based on Rashis,as in> Vimshottari,initially moon has a significant role.9 rashis dashas are> calculated based on janma nakshathra navamsha.Also it is suitable, if> navamsha lord of moon is with moon or aspects moon.Thus i feel> Kalachakra dasha is quite different from the Rashi dashas advised by> Jaimini.It can very well be classified under nakshathra dashas,as well.> > > If we study carefully, why immediate sthira and chara rashis are> avoided,can be understood.For a graha to influence another rashi a> minimum angle is must.Dwisabhava rashis are always in kendras from one> another,and hence there is no need for such an exclusion.> [s.Rath:] That again is an assumption. Rahu aspects the sign next to it> and there is no minimum angle required in this graha drishti. For> example if Rahu is in Pisces in 29 degrees, it aspects another planet> say Mars in Aries 1 degree and here the angle between the two is only> two degrees. So the minimum angle theory is wrong.> > Whether Rahu has got an aspect or not itself is debatable.They are> Chayagrahas and do not cast aspects.Rahu does not lord any signs.> > Rashi drishtis will explain how planets can influence another> rashi/planets,while thinking of Rashi based progressions.We should never> ever mix these two systems.> [s.Rath:] Firstly, these are not two systems. You have assumed again> that there are only two types of aspects and hence the development of> the theory is wrong. There can be and are many other types of aspects.> Some of these are (1) graha drishti (2) rashi drishti and (3) nakshatra> drishti...you forgot the third one.> > Pradeep:Thanks for reminding the same.I will read more.Sreenadh ji had> mentioned this some time back.May be it points to existence of another> system purely based on constellations and without any signs.Could you> tell why adjacent rashis are ignored in case of chara/sthira.> > Also i got a chance today to listen to the audio from shri Rath ji.He is> a scholar and got indepth knowledge.Also im thankful and respectful> towards his contributions and sharing of free knoweldge.But i have> disagreements regarding his understandings on Divisional charts and> Karakamsha analsysis.> [s.Rath:] You are free to try your own system, and this is not the first> time you are saying this.> > Chandrena Gouryam - It simply means if Chandra is there in Karakamsha> Rashi,then one worships Gowri.Similarly Rahu Durga - Shri Rath has> brought in concepts of Rashi drishti.Jaimini has not told us to use> rashi drishti in so called ''D-9''.> [s.Rath:] Are you sure of this statement? Listen to my recent audio> about this in the Atri SJC class for further clarification. Someone> present there can help you.> Pradeep:I will listen.But if i say it is your assumption that Jaimini> expected us to take rashi drishti in ''D-9'' arrangement ,what will be> your opinion.Also do all those shlokas mention conjunction of planets> with ketu.> > Let us take a case which i had mentioned in the past too.Sun joining> Karakamsha will give political connections - Most translators have> interpreted this as Sun joining Atmakaraka in the navamsha.This is not> correct,as, then all with Sun as Atmakaraka will have political> connections.> [s.Rath:] 'political connection' is not what was meant by the> translation.'> Pradeep:Sorry it is not connections but political activities> itself.Still i feel there is a point.> > We have only 12 Rashis.The rashi on to which Atmakaraka graha has> navamsha becomes Karakamsha Rashi.If Sun is placed in this Rashi,then> the yoga applies.> [s.Rath:] There is a difference between Karakamsa and Karakamsaka ...see> the additional 'ka' used in the end. Similarly there is a difference> between Lagnamsa and Lagnamsaka where the last word has a 'ka' attached> in the end implying that the sign is taken back to the rashi chart. So> lagnamsaka dasa is a dasa used in the rashi chart. You are trying to use> Karakamsa rules for Karakamsaka rashi. I think you are completely> confused about all these basics. Let us be clear on terminology first.> > Pradeep:These are essentially the same.Karakamsha is pointing to the> amsha of karaka graha.Karakamsha''ka'' is the proper grammatic form to> represent the rashi on to which it has amsha.For me these transfering> back to ''Rashi''does not happen at all.It is always happening in the> same 12 rashis,but different kinds of sambandhas.If we write> navamsha/dashamsha etc along with natal position in the chart,how untidy> and cumbersome it would be.Those who try to understand in a> comprehensive way will find all part of the same framework.It depends on> the speed of rashis,w.r to harmonics of various divisionals. I feel am> not confused at all.If i say it is your assumption to think of graha> drishti in varga arrangements - can you correct me.Parashara has never> mentioned about any such charts.Graha drishti fundamentals can never> digest these aspects.> > Shani joining Karakamsha rashi - fame and doing well in his line of> occupation.It is very clear that,the rashi on to which Atmakaraka graha> has amsha is the environment where the aatma or soul has applied> prana/life(navamshas are navapranas).If a hardworking planet like Saturn> is there to promote the desire of soul,will not that person become> famous in his line?> [s.Rath:] Why do you assume this? Do you not know that behind the> success of any and every human being stands 90% hard work (saturn) and> only 10% luck and other factors. So will Shani not give fame in one line> of work simply because the native puts his heart and soul behind the> work.> > > This is not at all a personal criticism but an astrological> disagreement.If shri Rath finds time to reply ,it will be highly> beneficial for the astrological community.> [s.Rath:] Replied today...but don't waste time without reading the> archives of the various groups. I have answered these questions so many> times. Perhaps you should get in touch with someone like Jaan (Umesh> Kulasingham) or Visti who can mail you a CD with all my old mails.> > Pradeep:I can get the CD's if you think i will get some answers with> classical references,regarding usage of a)divisional charts b)Rashi> drishti usage in navamsha.Else you too might agree,if i treat your> views as assumptions:-).I have read archives and various sites/articles> from you,but never there was any explanations meeting my questions.> > Pradeep, that will help you.> > Have a nice day but do keep reading...even if I am not going to be> finding time to answer to you due to my so many other commitments.> > Thanks again for your valuale time.> It is my feeling that, as Karakas are based on the degrees planets have> traversed in signs,Rashi dashas(Jaimini) along with such karakas and> Rashi aspects forms completely a different sysytem as compared to> nakshthra dashas,advised by Parashara.>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sourav ji Namaskaaram

 

I do not have an answer for your questions justifying our

conscience.Thus let us try collectively and see if we could arrive at

Truth.Hope his grace will help us in this regard.i will write more if i

anything intersting comes to mind.

Thanks to Sanjay ji and others for sharing their views.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

sohamsa , " Sourav " <souravc108 wrote:

>

>

> || Hare Rama Krishna ||

>

> Dear Vijaydas-ji,

>

> Namaskar. Without going into any

> possible disputes/arguments I would like to state that as a student

who

> is still struggling with basics, I am also in the want of conceptual

> understanding of rasi aspects. My questions are similar to your first

> e-mail.

>

> (1) Why Chara -rasis aspect (or have mutual control on each other

with)

> sthira rasis and Dwisabhaba rasis aspect each other? Why not adjacent

> rasis?

>

> (2) Why this aspect is based on chara-sthira-dwisabhaba classification

> of rasis and why not on other classifications viz. odd/even,

> odd-footed-even-footed-ness, udaya, rasi tattva (fiery, earthy etc).?

>

> -- For example, out of the tattva classification, in each class there

> are three rasis, chara-sthira-disabhaba and in each class there are

> mutual rasi drishti's between two of the three rasis. Hence my idea

that

> tattva can have a possible bearning. I do not know how.

>

> (3) Does rasi aspect have anything to do with sambandhas of their

lords

> (e.g. relation per planetary cabinet) ?

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Sourav

>

> ========================================================

>

> sohamsa , " vijayadas_pradeep "

> vijayadas_pradeep@ wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sanjay ji

> >

> > Thanks a lot for your time.

> > Kindly see my replies.

> >

> > Warm regds

> > Pradeep

> >

> > If shri Rath is unable to answer i am requesting other learned

members

> > like shri Sanjay Prabhakaran to comment on Rashi drishtis.

> > [s.Rath:] 'unable' is not the right word. It assumes too much. I

told

> > you so many times that I don't have to answer which you cannot take

> for

> > some reason. Try 'would not like to answer' next time. It can start

> > changing things inside.

> >

> > Pradeep:''Unable'' was not having any specific intention.It can be

> lack

> > of time as well.Kindly understand.

> >

> > My strong feeling is Rashi drishtis are not to be used along with

> graha

> > drishtis.

> > Rashi dashas are not based on the nakshthra placement of moon and

> > progressions,rather that of Rashis.Grahas in chara rashis can

> influence

> > those in Sthira Rashis(chara has some reason to infleunce sthira and

> > vice-versa?).Similarly Grahas in Dwisabhava Rashis will influence

> those

> > in other dwisabhava rashis.

> > [s.Rath:] That is a wrong assumtion you have made. (1) Kalachakra

dasa

> > is a rashi dasa based on the nakshatra placement of the Moon. Su

dasa

> is

> > also a rashi dasa based on not only nakshatra placement of Moon but

> also

> > of Lagna degree. (2) statement in bold is a fact.

> >

> > 1)Though Kalachakra dasha has dasha orders based on Rashis,as in

> > Vimshottari,initially moon has a significant role.9 rashis dashas

are

> > calculated based on janma nakshathra navamsha.Also it is suitable,

if

> > navamsha lord of moon is with moon or aspects moon.Thus i feel

> > Kalachakra dasha is quite different from the Rashi dashas advised by

> > Jaimini.It can very well be classified under nakshathra dashas,as

> well.

> >

> >

> > If we study carefully, why immediate sthira and chara rashis are

> > avoided,can be understood.For a graha to influence another rashi a

> > minimum angle is must.Dwisabhava rashis are always in kendras from

one

> > another,and hence there is no need for such an exclusion.

> > [s.Rath:] That again is an assumption. Rahu aspects the sign next to

> it

> > and there is no minimum angle required in this graha drishti. For

> > example if Rahu is in Pisces in 29 degrees, it aspects another

planet

> > say Mars in Aries 1 degree and here the angle between the two is

only

> > two degrees. So the minimum angle theory is wrong.

> >

> > Whether Rahu has got an aspect or not itself is debatable.They are

> > Chayagrahas and do not cast aspects.Rahu does not lord any signs.

> >

> > Rashi drishtis will explain how planets can influence another

> > rashi/planets,while thinking of Rashi based progressions.We should

> never

> > ever mix these two systems.

> > [s.Rath:] Firstly, these are not two systems. You have assumed again

> > that there are only two types of aspects and hence the development

of

> > the theory is wrong. There can be and are many other types of

aspects.

> > Some of these are (1) graha drishti (2) rashi drishti and (3)

> nakshatra

> > drishti...you forgot the third one.

> >

> > Pradeep:Thanks for reminding the same.I will read more.Sreenadh ji

had

> > mentioned this some time back.May be it points to existence of

another

> > system purely based on constellations and without any signs.Could

you

> > tell why adjacent rashis are ignored in case of chara/sthira.

> >

> > Also i got a chance today to listen to the audio from shri Rath

ji.He

> is

> > a scholar and got indepth knowledge.Also im thankful and respectful

> > towards his contributions and sharing of free knoweldge.But i have

> > disagreements regarding his understandings on Divisional charts and

> > Karakamsha analsysis.

> > [s.Rath:] You are free to try your own system, and this is not the

> first

> > time you are saying this.

> >

> > Chandrena Gouryam - It simply means if Chandra is there in

Karakamsha

> > Rashi,then one worships Gowri.Similarly Rahu Durga - Shri Rath has

> > brought in concepts of Rashi drishti.Jaimini has not told us to use

> > rashi drishti in so called ''D-9''.

> > [s.Rath:] Are you sure of this statement? Listen to my recent

audio

> > about this in the Atri SJC class for further clarification. Someone

> > present there can help you.

> > Pradeep:I will listen.But if i say it is your assumption that

Jaimini

> > expected us to take rashi drishti in ''D-9'' arrangement ,what will

be

> > your opinion.Also do all those shlokas mention conjunction of

planets

> > with ketu.

> >

> > Let us take a case which i had mentioned in the past too.Sun joining

> > Karakamsha will give political connections - Most translators have

> > interpreted this as Sun joining Atmakaraka in the navamsha.This is

not

> > correct,as, then all with Sun as Atmakaraka will have political

> > connections.

> > [s.Rath:] 'political connection' is not what was meant by the

> > translation.'

> > Pradeep:Sorry it is not connections but political activities

> > itself.Still i feel there is a point.

> >

> > We have only 12 Rashis.The rashi on to which Atmakaraka graha has

> > navamsha becomes Karakamsha Rashi.If Sun is placed in this

Rashi,then

> > the yoga applies.

> > [s.Rath:] There is a difference between Karakamsa and Karakamsaka

> ...see

> > the additional 'ka' used in the end. Similarly there is a difference

> > between Lagnamsa and Lagnamsaka where the last word has a 'ka'

> attached

> > in the end implying that the sign is taken back to the rashi chart.

So

> > lagnamsaka dasa is a dasa used in the rashi chart. You are trying to

> use

> > Karakamsa rules for Karakamsaka rashi. I think you are completely

> > confused about all these basics. Let us be clear on terminology

first.

> >

> > Pradeep:These are essentially the same.Karakamsha is pointing to the

> > amsha of karaka graha.Karakamsha''ka'' is the proper grammatic form

to

> > represent the rashi on to which it has amsha.For me these

transfering

> > back to ''Rashi''does not happen at all.It is always happening in

the

> > same 12 rashis,but different kinds of sambandhas.If we write

> > navamsha/dashamsha etc along with natal position in the chart,how

> untidy

> > and cumbersome it would be.Those who try to understand in a

> > comprehensive way will find all part of the same framework.It

depends

> on

> > the speed of rashis,w.r to harmonics of various divisionals. I feel

am

> > not confused at all.If i say it is your assumption to think of graha

> > drishti in varga arrangements - can you correct me.Parashara has

never

> > mentioned about any such charts.Graha drishti fundamentals can never

> > digest these aspects.

> >

> > Shani joining Karakamsha rashi - fame and doing well in his line of

> > occupation.It is very clear that,the rashi on to which Atmakaraka

> graha

> > has amsha is the environment where the aatma or soul has applied

> > prana/life(navamshas are navapranas).If a hardworking planet like

> Saturn

> > is there to promote the desire of soul,will not that person become

> > famous in his line?

> > [s.Rath:] Why do you assume this? Do you not know that behind the

> > success of any and every human being stands 90% hard work (saturn)

and

> > only 10% luck and other factors. So will Shani not give fame in one

> line

> > of work simply because the native puts his heart and soul behind the

> > work.

> >

> >

> > This is not at all a personal criticism but an astrological

> > disagreement.If shri Rath finds time to reply ,it will be highly

> > beneficial for the astrological community.

> > [s.Rath:] Replied today...but don't waste time without reading the

> > archives of the various groups. I have answered these questions so

> many

> > times. Perhaps you should get in touch with someone like Jaan (Umesh

> > Kulasingham) or Visti who can mail you a CD with all my old mails.

> >

> > Pradeep:I can get the CD's if you think i will get some answers with

> > classical references,regarding usage of a)divisional charts b)Rashi

> > drishti usage in navamsha.Else you too might agree,if i treat your

> > views as assumptions:-).I have read archives and various

> sites/articles

> > from you,but never there was any explanations meeting my questions.

> >

> > Pradeep, that will help you.

> >

> > Have a nice day but do keep reading...even if I am not going to be

> > finding time to answer to you due to my so many other commitments.

> >

> > Thanks again for your valuale time.

> > It is my feeling that, as Karakas are based on the degrees planets

> have

> > traversed in signs,Rashi dashas(Jaimini) along with such karakas and

> > Rashi aspects forms completely a different sysytem as compared to

> > nakshthra dashas,advised by Parashara.

> >

>