Cycles of nine: Pluto?

[Guest guest]

C. B. Willis writes:

>If the outer planets were clearly redundant no one would have been using

>them all this time, i.e. since there were officially discovered in more

>recent decades. They are not physically redundant, nor are they

>astrologically redundant. 9 has its esoteric attractiveness, but then so

>does 12. Both numbers have a certain " completeness " about them, but

>redundancy does not come to mind about such completeness.

 

* Nine has more significance in Jyotish than you give it credit for. There

are 27 naksatras, forming the basis of the predictive systems of Parasara.

Each cycle of nine, from Aswini to Aslesha; then Magha to Jyeshta; and then

Mula to Revati, are all ruled by the nine planets from Ketu to Mercury.

(There would be no part for the outer planets to be added this system, for

obvious reasons).

 

* Kalachakra dasa: It is based upon the Moon's placement in naksatra padas,

which are essentially Navamsas of signs. The progression of dasas is thus

based upon the flow of Navamsas, from Aries to Pisces, and then a reverse

direction starting from Scorpio. With four different progressions of

dasas, the Navamsas complete a perfect circle, thus maintaining the

symmetry of the system. Needless to say, if you take the feminine sign out

of Mars and Jupiter's rulership, and the masculine sign out of Saturn's

rulership, you have effectively destroyed the system of Navamsas which

underlay this dasa system.

 

* Navamsa dasa: It allots one year of life to each Navamsa, and thus nine

years of the dasa cover one Rasi sign. Four signs = 36 years, which

constitute the first Khanda, or term of longevity; 36 to 72 for the second;

and finally, 72 to 108 for long life. Navamsa dasa, like Shoola dasa, form

the basis for predicting longevity in Jyotish.

 

* The Navamsa chart itself is the most significant and universally applied

of the varga charts. You would not be able to even calculate or use it if

you added a 10th, 11th, or 12th planet to the scheme.

 

No, Parasara did not intend to add the outer planets, and this can be seen

if you consider the logic and scheme behind the Parasari systems. In

Ashtakavarga, 7 planets plus the ascendant are used. Why would Parasara

develop Ashtakavarga, and then suggest some obscure planets that did not

fit into the scheme? And why would Parasara develop numerous naksatra

dasas according to the belt of 27 constellations, if he wanted to recommend

use of the outer planets, which have no rulership of naksatras?

 

Ponder all of this for a while, and then if your appetite is strong enough,

I can give some more examples to show how Parasara never intended the outer

planets to work within the schemology of Jyotish.

 

Namaskara,

Robert

 

 

 

=====================================

Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer

760 NW Broken Arrow Rd.

Bend, OR. 97701-9037

Phone: 541-318-0248

visit <http://www.robertkoch.com> or e-mail

rk. rk