Guest guest Posted December 29, 2007 Report Share Posted December 29, 2007 Dear Prabodh, But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the 10th lord for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th lord? After all you did say "2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga" in your mail. Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekhar ji Namaste This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own will not qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact Mars qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord(without blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th or 10th lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two FB is only 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I mean >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of 9th and 10th >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should be without >blemish. >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because of graha >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. To clarify once again 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11. I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be true. I request you to go through that mail and reconsider your arguments. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that many a times > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the shlokas. However > carrying your argument further and accepting what you say, though not > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your attention to Karka > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who happens to be the > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you therefore say that > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th lord is here > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord can be > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of what Parashara > says, as you see it? > > > Think about this. > > take care, > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has described while > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply said that > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and Budha are > > Rajyogkarak. > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and 4th lord for > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be Yogakarka but > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where parashara has > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we get correct idea > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled Yogadyaya of BPHS. > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given in detail graha > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I wanted to be > > focused with the context in which we had the discussions. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to Rajyoga? Or is not > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are many grahas > > that > > > are not considered FB and yet can become rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I will try again. I > > did > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a graha has to > > lead > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) must have some > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. Blemish is for > > behaving > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of Shubhatva. > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of lordship of 3,6,8,11 > > > > simultaneously. > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of it 'Sambandha' with > > 10th > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not so (what you > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that Shubha is not > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB and what is > > shubha, > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic use of initials > > is > > > > too > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say "I mean only Shubha (FB) can > > be > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak" ? and then that the shubhas should be > > > > without > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a shubha is not so > > (what > > > > you > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my comprehension could > > be > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and Shubha being so > > at > > > > this > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. Trikonesh(5th/9th) is FB > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along with 10th lord > > can > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has indicated many > > things by > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed directly. That is > > the > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about Shubha or Ashubha > > of > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, it has > > discussed in > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In that it clearly says > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH". Keeping this in mind if > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may get correct > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and their > > undisputed > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but what about > > those > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in Laghu > > Parashari? > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we follow? Laghu > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you meant by Benefic in the > > > > > > original > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why the distinction > > between > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and Shubha being so > > at > > > > this > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such distinction in the shlokas of > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says that for Mithuna > > lagna > > > > > > only > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and specific rule into > > > > consideration? > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I mean > > only > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of 9th and 10th > > and > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should be without > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because of > > > > graha > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why for Mithuna Shani is > > > > Shubha > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets associated with 10th > > lord > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th lord so qualifies as > > RYK > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as well hence can not > > give RYK > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord can not lead to RYK > > even if > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only Mangal. Guru is 6th lord > > as > > > > well > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord Shukra is as well 3rd > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd hence RYK along > > with > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 12th hence RYK along > > with > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being 6th lord does not > > lead to > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal is 3rd lord as well > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes 2nd lordship leads to > > RYK > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas Benefic but 9th > > lord > > > > may > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord(Shukra for Vrishabha),it > > is > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord(Mangal for Vrishcika),it is > > > > Sama- > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord(Shukra for Tula),it is > > Sama- > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( Mangal for Mesha), it is > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and their > > undisputed > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but what about > > those > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in Laghu > > Parashari? > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that Laghu Parashari was > > always > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called Ududaya Pradeep. > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various pandits who > > remembered > > > > them > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different shloka amongst > > themselves. > > > > So it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in Laghu Parashari from > > whose > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in most of the other > > editions > > > > of > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the following shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau randhraläbhädhipau yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà labhate naraù ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are also lords of 8^th or > > > > 11^th > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to (Raj) Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra Jha edition should > > have > > > > that > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by lord of the 9th due to > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made amply clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, being 12th house > > lord > > > > to > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva shubhado mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh as well,then it will > > > > become > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit Sansthan BPHS by > > Devashandra > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a condition of 8th lord > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says carefully, again. He says > > that > > > > only > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed in Lagna or the 8th > > it > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not say about its being > > > > shubha > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine to it. I am pasting > > the > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as much is lost in English > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä lagnädhéço'pi cet svayam ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not auspicious, being 12^th > > house > > > > lord > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also Lord of lagna and > > occupies > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring to any other shloka, > > > > please > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if as well be trine > > lord > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per Parashara, 8th house > > is > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So when 8th lord is > > colord > > > > of > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect badly to bhgaya and > > hence > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as functional > > benefics, for > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you rightly deduce. > > generally > > > > if > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is the 6th or the 8th it > > is > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance following , if required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet is lord of 1st and > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for Libra Asc, is not > > > > considered > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet is lord of 5'th > > *and* > > > > 8'th > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar Asc and placed in > > 5'th > > > > *or > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet is lord of 8'th and > > 9'th > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, but should not be > > fully > > > > good > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting exceptions to other houeses > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 Dear Prabodh Ji, Namaskaar, in my case mars is both 9'th and 2nd lord placed in 6'th, lagna is pisces, Why it has never given me good results, I found it as a MF. Why as per ur judgement it's not a FB in essence. regards, Lalit. Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh Vekhande " <amolmandar wrote: > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have already said > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the last > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > To clarify once again > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11. > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered 5th > lord as Yogakarak. > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite of the > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani is only > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord Chandra who > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding this > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It says > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th lord > Budha as Yogakarak. > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as Yogakarak > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th lord is not > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > Prabodh Vekhande > Jai Jai Shankar > Har Har Shankar > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the 10th > lord > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th lord? > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga " in > your mail. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own will not > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact Mars > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord(without > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th or 10th > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two FB is > only > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I mean > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of 9th and > 10th > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should be > without > > > >blemish. > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because of graha > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be true. I > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your arguments. > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > Chandrashekhar > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that many a times > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the shlokas. > > > However > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you say, > though > > > not > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your attention > to > > > Karka > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who happens to > be > > > the > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you therefore > say > > > that > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th lord is here > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord can be > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of what > > > Parashara > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has described > > > while > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply said > that > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and Budha are > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and 4th > lord for > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be Yogakarka > but > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where parashara has > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we get > correct > > > idea > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled Yogadyaya of > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given in detail > > > graha > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I wanted to > be > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the discussions. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to Rajyoga? > Or is > > > not > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are many > grahas > > > > > that > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I will try > > > again. I > > > > > did > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a graha > has to > > > > > lead > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) must have > some > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. Blemish is > for > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of lordship of > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of it 'Sambandha' > with > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not so (what > you > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that Shubha > is > > > not > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB and what > is > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic use of > > > initials > > > > > is > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I mean only Shubha > (FB) > > > can > > > > > be > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then that the shubhas > > > should be > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a shubha is > not so > > > > > (what > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my comprehension > > > could > > > > > be > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and Shubha > > > being so > > > > > at > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. Trikonesh > (5th/9th) > > > is FB > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along with > 10th > > > lord > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has indicated > many > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed directly. > That > > > is > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about Shubha or > > > Ashubha > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, it has > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In that it > clearly > > > says > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . Keeping this in > mind > > > if > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may get > correct > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and their > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but what > about > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in Laghu > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we follow? > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 I mean Venus - Functional Malific. regards, Lalit. Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Prbodh Ji, > > Namaskaar, I have thought but sorry didnt find mars is giving me > good results - you are aware of my chart and some part of life too. > > pls. give some light on this point. > > May be something is missing somewhere. > > My observations are - Jupitor made my personality and Venus has > given me worldly achievements, almost 75 - 80 % of what i got so > far.. I dont know why people considers such a venus FB, in my case > its 3rd and 8'th lord placed in 4'th house. > > Ketu gives me insight and Sun+Mars togather made me daring. Saturn > made me hard working.., Sun also made me satwika even when dealing > with enemies. > > this is what i understood about me. > > Pls. explain Mars's role in my chart and life, it may correct me > where i m wrong. > > Can u tell me how is 2008, what about the girl i m thinking for > right now.. > > regards, > Lalit. > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh Vekhande " > <amolmandar@> wrote: > > > > Dear Lalit ji Namaste > > It is not my judgement. Parashara has written that and I am trying > to > > find out logic behind this. Parashara says that to Meena lagna > Mars > > is FB and Yogakarak. I am just telling why is it so? > > If you think more you will find Parashara is true in your case as > > well. > > > > By the way, your mail reached to forum in Mars hora and when Mars > was > > in Lagna! So it is indeed FB for you. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " litsol " > > <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh Ji, > > > > > > Namaskaar, in my case mars is both 9'th and 2nd lord placed in > > 6'th, > > > lagna is pisces, Why it has never given me good results, I found > it > > > as a MF. > > > > > > Why as per ur judgement it's not a FB in essence. > > > > > > regards, > > > Lalit. > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh > Vekhande " > > > <amolmandar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have > already > > > said > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the > > last > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered > 5th > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite > of > > the > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani > is > > > only > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord Chandra > > who > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding > this > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It > > says > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th > lord > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > > Yogakarak > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th lord > is > > > not > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th > lord? > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga " > in > > > > your mail. > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own > > will > > > not > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact > > Mars > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord > > (without > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th > or > > > 10th > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two > FB > > is > > > > only > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I > mean > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of > 9th > > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should > be > > > > without > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because > of > > > graha > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be > > true. I > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that many > a > > > times > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the > > > shlokas. > > > > > > However > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you > say, > > > > though > > > > > > not > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > > attention > > > > to > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who > happens > > > to > > > > be > > > > > > the > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you > > > therefore > > > > say > > > > > > that > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th lord > is > > > here > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord > > can > > > be > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of > what > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has > > > described > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply > > said > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and > Budha > > > are > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and > 4th > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > > Yogakarka > > > > but > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > parashara > > > has > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we > get > > > > correct > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled Yogadyaya > of > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given > in > > > detail > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I > > wanted > > > to > > > > be > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > Rajyoga? > > > > Or is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are > > many > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I > will > > try > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a > > graha > > > > has to > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) > must > > > have > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. > Blemish > > is > > > > for > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > lordship of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not > so > > > (what > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that > > > Shubha > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB > and > > > what > > > > is > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic > use > > of > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I mean only > > > Shubha > > > > (FB) > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then that the > > shubhas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a > shubha > > is > > > > not so > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > > comprehension > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > Shubha > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. Trikonesh > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along > > with > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has > > indicated > > > > many > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > > directly. > > > > That > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about > > Shubha > > > or > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, > it > > has > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In that > it > > > > clearly > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . Keeping > this > > in > > > > mind > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may > get > > > > correct > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > their > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > what > > > > about > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included > in > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we > > > follow? > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 1, 2008 Report Share Posted January 1, 2008 Dear Lalit ji Namaste I think your observation about yourself is wrong! It is not Jupiter but Mars that has made your personality. Jupiter has given you the Buddhi but it is influenced by Mars. I say this looking at your chart and your style of writting and in general behavior on the net. Many a times you have said that you had 'Sakshatkar' of verious GODS. Dont you feel it is because of Mars in 6th? Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Prbodh Ji, > > Namaskaar, I have thought but sorry didnt find mars is giving me > good results - you are aware of my chart and some part of life too. > > pls. give some light on this point. > > May be something is missing somewhere. > > My observations are - Jupitor made my personality and Venus has > given me worldly achievements, almost 75 - 80 % of what i got so > far.. I dont know why people considers such a venus FB, in my case > its 3rd and 8'th lord placed in 4'th house. > > Ketu gives me insight and Sun+Mars togather made me daring. Saturn > made me hard working.., Sun also made me satwika even when dealing > with enemies. > > this is what i understood about me. > > Pls. explain Mars's role in my chart and life, it may correct me > where i m wrong. > > Can u tell me how is 2008, what about the girl i m thinking for > right now.. > > regards, > Lalit. > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh Vekhande " > <amolmandar@> wrote: > > > > Dear Lalit ji Namaste > > It is not my judgement. Parashara has written that and I am trying > to > > find out logic behind this. Parashara says that to Meena lagna > Mars > > is FB and Yogakarak. I am just telling why is it so? > > If you think more you will find Parashara is true in your case as > > well. > > > > By the way, your mail reached to forum in Mars hora and when Mars > was > > in Lagna! So it is indeed FB for you. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " litsol " > > <litsol@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh Ji, > > > > > > Namaskaar, in my case mars is both 9'th and 2nd lord placed in > > 6'th, > > > lagna is pisces, Why it has never given me good results, I found > it > > > as a MF. > > > > > > Why as per ur judgement it's not a FB in essence. > > > > > > regards, > > > Lalit. > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh > Vekhande " > > > <amolmandar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have > already > > > said > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the > > last > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered > 5th > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite > of > > the > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani > is > > > only > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord Chandra > > who > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding > this > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It > > says > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th > lord > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > > Yogakarak > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th lord > is > > > not > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th > lord? > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga " > in > > > > your mail. > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own > > will > > > not > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact > > Mars > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord > > (without > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th > or > > > 10th > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two > FB > > is > > > > only > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I > mean > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of > 9th > > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should > be > > > > without > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because > of > > > graha > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be > > true. I > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that many > a > > > times > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the > > > shlokas. > > > > > > However > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you > say, > > > > though > > > > > > not > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > > attention > > > > to > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who > happens > > > to > > > > be > > > > > > the > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you > > > therefore > > > > say > > > > > > that > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th lord > is > > > here > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord > > can > > > be > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of > what > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has > > > described > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply > > said > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and > Budha > > > are > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and > 4th > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > > Yogakarka > > > > but > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > parashara > > > has > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we > get > > > > correct > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled Yogadyaya > of > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given > in > > > detail > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I > > wanted > > > to > > > > be > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > Rajyoga? > > > > Or is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are > > many > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I > will > > try > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a > > graha > > > > has to > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) > must > > > have > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. > Blemish > > is > > > > for > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > lordship of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not > so > > > (what > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that > > > Shubha > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB > and > > > what > > > > is > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic > use > > of > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I mean only > > > Shubha > > > > (FB) > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then that the > > shubhas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a > shubha > > is > > > > not so > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > > comprehension > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > Shubha > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. Trikonesh > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along > > with > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has > > indicated > > > > many > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > > directly. > > > > That > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about > > Shubha > > > or > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, > it > > has > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In that > it > > > > clearly > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . Keeping > this > > in > > > > mind > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may > get > > > > correct > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > their > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > what > > > > about > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included > in > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we > > > follow? > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Chandrashekhar ji Namaste What is the problem? Why cant you understand that 9th/10th if without blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord even if without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For Kumbha lagna, 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th lord is without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that is why it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of each lagna and if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka status. Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. That is why it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to 9th/10th to find Yogakaraka. For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like situation! Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only 9th/10th lords are > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and then in the same > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th is not considered > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord also owns the 10th > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only *9th and 10th lords > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th and 10th lords > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have erred in saying > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, as he owns the > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it be so, then indeed > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand what you are saying. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have already said > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the last > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered 5th > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite of the > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani is only > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord Chandra who > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding this > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It says > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th lord > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as Yogakarak > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th lord is not > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the 10th > > lord > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th lord? > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga " in > > your mail. > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own will not > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact Mars > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord (without > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th or 10th > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two FB is > > only > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I mean > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of 9th and > > 10th > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should be > > without > > > > >blemish. > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because of graha > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be true. I > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your arguments. > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that many a times > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the shlokas. > > > > However > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you say, > > though > > > > not > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your attention > > to > > > > Karka > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who happens to > > be > > > > the > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you therefore > > say > > > > that > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th lord is here > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord can be > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of what > > > > Parashara > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has described > > > > while > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply said > > that > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and Budha are > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and 4th > > lord for > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be Yogakarka > > but > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where parashara has > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we get > > correct > > > > idea > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled Yogadyaya of > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given in detail > > > > graha > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I wanted to > > be > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to Rajyoga? > > Or is > > > > not > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are many > > grahas > > > > > > that > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I will try > > > > again. I > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a graha > > has to > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) must have > > some > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. Blemish is > > for > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of lordship of > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of it 'Sambandha' > > with > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not so (what > > you > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that Shubha > > is > > > > not > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB and what > > is > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic use of > > > > initials > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I mean only Shubha > > (FB) > > > > can > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then that the shubhas > > > > should be > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a shubha is > > not so > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my comprehension > > > > could > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and Shubha > > > > being so > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. Trikonesh > > (5th/9th) > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along with > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has indicated > > many > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed directly. > > That > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about Shubha or > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, it has > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In that it > > clearly > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . Keeping this in > > mind > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may get > > correct > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and their > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but what > > about > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in Laghu > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we follow? > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you meant by > > Benefic > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why the > > distinction > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and Shubha > > > > being so > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such distinction in the > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says that for > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and specific rule into > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I > > > > mean > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of 9th > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should be > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) > > > > because of > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why for Mithuna > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets associated > > with > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th lord so > > qualifies > > > > as > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as well hence can > > not > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord can not lead > > to RYK > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only Mangal. Guru is > > 6th > > > > lord > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord Shukra is as > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd hence RYK > > along > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 12th hence RYK > > > > along > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being 6th lord does > > not > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal is 3rd lord as > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes 2nd lordship > > > > leads to > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas Benefic > > but 9th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord(Shukra for > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord(Mangal for > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord(Shukra for > > Tula),it is > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( Mangal for > > Mesha), it > > > > is > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and their > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but what > > about > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in Laghu > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that Laghu > > Parashari > > > > was > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called Ududaya > > Pradeep. > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various pandits who > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different shloka amongst > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in Laghu Parashari > > from > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in most of the > > other > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the following > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau randhraläbhädhipau yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà labhate naraù > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are also lords of > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to (Raj) Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra Jha edition > > should > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by lord of the 9th > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made amply clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, being 12th > > > > house > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva shubhado mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh as well,then > > it > > > > will > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit Sansthan BPHS by > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a condition of 8th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says carefully, again. > > He > > > > says > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed in Lagna or > > the > > > > 8th > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not say about > > its > > > > being > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine to it. I am > > > > pasting > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as much is lost in > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä lagnädhéço'pi cet > > svayam > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not auspicious, being > > 12^th > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also Lord of lagna > > and > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring to any other > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if as well be > > trine > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per Parashara, 8th > > > > house > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So when 8th > > lord is > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect badly to bhgaya > > and > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as functional > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you rightly deduce. > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is the 6th or the > > > > 8th it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance following , if > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet is lord of > > 1st > > > > and > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for Libra Asc, is > > not > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet is lord of > > 5'th > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar Asc and > > placed > > > > in > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet is lord of > > 8'th > > > > and > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, but should > > not > > > > be > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting exceptions to other > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Chandrashekhar ji Namaste I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should get 5th lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you Dhanu lagna case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not Yogakaraka. Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for yogakaraka then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th lord? Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so qualifies as yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is not Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear idea what Parashara teaches. Again try to understand 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka status. Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as Yogakaraka 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as Yogakaraka and blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. This logic is applicable uniformly. On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th lord we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th is yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward any theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) read it with open heart you will find that the above logic works uniformly for all Lagnas. > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and also > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does not > arise at all. Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic Jyotish and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish circle. You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding does not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen but I honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve Jyotish through Sunday class I will be more than happy. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that 5th lord can > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not be yoga > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That being the > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara lagna Shukra > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, Shukra > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You have advanced > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka lagna. However > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for Karka lagna > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he is lord of a > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, unlike me, you > both read and understand what is written you must know where Parashara > makes this abundantly clear. > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and also > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does not > arise at all. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that 9th/10th if without > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord even if > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For Kumbha lagna, > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th lord is > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that is why > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of each lagna and > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka status. > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. That is why > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to 9th/10th to > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like situation! > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only 9th/10th lords > > are > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and then in the > > same > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th is not > > considered > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord also owns the > > 10th > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only *9th and 10th > > lords > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th and 10th > > lords > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have erred in > > saying > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, as he owns > > the > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it be so, then > > indeed > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand what you are > > saying. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have already > > said > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the last > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered 5th > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite of > > the > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani is > > only > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord Chandra who > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding this > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It says > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th lord > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > Yogakarak > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > not > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the 10th > > > > lord > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th lord? > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga " in > > > > your mail. > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own > > will not > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact > > Mars > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord > > (without > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th or > > 10th > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two FB > > is > > > > only > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I mean > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of 9th > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should be > > > > without > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because of > > graha > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be > > true. I > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that many a > > times > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the > > shlokas. > > > > > > However > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you say, > > > > though > > > > > > not > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > attention > > > > to > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who happens > > to > > > > be > > > > > > the > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you > > therefore > > > > say > > > > > > that > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th lord is > > here > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord > > can be > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of what > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has > > described > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply > > said > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and Budha > > are > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and 4th > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > Yogakarka > > > > but > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > parashara has > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we get > > > > correct > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled Yogadyaya of > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given in > > detail > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I > > wanted to > > > > be > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > Rajyoga? > > > > Or is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are > > many > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I will > > try > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a > > graha > > > > has to > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) must > > have > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. Blemish > > is > > > > for > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of lordship of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not so > > (what > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that > > Shubha > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB and > > what > > > > is > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic use > > of > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I mean only > > Shubha > > > > (FB) > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then that the > > shubhas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a shubha is > > > > not so > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > comprehension > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > Shubha > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. Trikonesh > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along > > with > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has indicated > > > > many > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > directly. > > > > That > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about > > Shubha or > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, it > > has > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In that it > > > > clearly > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . Keeping this > > in > > > > mind > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may get > > > > correct > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > their > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > what > > > > about > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we > > follow? > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you meant by > > > > Benefic > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why the > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > Shubha > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such distinction in the > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says that > > for > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and specific rule > > into > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > Shubha. I > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of > > 9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > should be > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as > > RY) > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why for > > Mithuna > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets > > associated > > > > with > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th lord so > > > > qualifies > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as well hence > > can > > > > not > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord can not > > lead > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only Mangal. Guru > > is > > > > 6th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord Shukra > > is as > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not lead to > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd hence > > RYK > > > > along > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 12th hence > > RYK > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being 6th lord > > does > > > > not > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal is 3rd > > lord as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes 2nd > > lordship > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas Benefic > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord(Shukra for > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord(Mangal for > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord(Shukra for > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( Mangal for > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > their > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > what > > > > about > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that Laghu > > > > Parashari > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called Ududaya > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various pandits > > who > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different shloka > > amongst > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in Laghu > > Parashari > > > > from > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in most of the > > > > other > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the following > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau randhraläbhädhipau > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà labhate > > naraù > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are also > > lords of > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to (Raj) > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra Jha > > edition > > > > should > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by lord of > > the 9th > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made amply > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, being > > 12th > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva shubhado > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh as > > well,then > > > > it > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit Sansthan > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a condition > > of 8th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says carefully, > > again. > > > > He > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed in > > Lagna or > > > > the > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not say > > about > > > > its > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine to it. > > I am > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as much is > > lost in > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä lagnädhéço'pi cet > > > > svayam > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not auspicious, > > being > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also Lord of > > lagna > > > > and > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring to any > > other > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if as well > > be > > > > trine > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So when 8th > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect badly to > > bhgaya > > > > and > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as > > functional > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you rightly > > deduce. > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is the 6th > > or the > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance following , > > if > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet is lord > > of > > > > 1st > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for Libra > > Asc, is > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet is lord > > of > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar Asc and > > > > placed > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet is lord > > of > > > > 8'th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, but > > should > > > > not > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting exceptions to > > other > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Dear Prabodh, I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that 5th lord can be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically indicated by Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is this not carrying it too far? Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why Parashara does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to say so specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha lagna though he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that Mars is shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by your arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being capable of being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to differentiate between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or does the 9th lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for Simha Lagna. Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply it. The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this discussion by you, and not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same time I was also taught not to go by the dictum of "Baba Vakayam Pramanam". If discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to cause hurt to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on since the days when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will continue no matter what. Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekhar ji Namaste I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should get 5th lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you Dhanu lagna case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not Yogakaraka. Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for yogakaraka then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th lord? Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so qualifies as yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is not Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear idea what Parashara teaches. Again try to understand 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka status. Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as Yogakaraka 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as Yogakaraka and blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. This logic is applicable uniformly. On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th lord we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th is yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward any theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) read it with open heart you will find that the above logic works uniformly for all Lagnas. > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and also > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does not > arise at all. Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic Jyotish and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish circle. You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding does not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen but I honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve Jyotish through Sunday class I will be more than happy. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that 5th lord can > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not be yoga > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That being the > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara lagna Shukra > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, Shukra > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You have advanced > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka lagna. However > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for Karka lagna > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he is lord of a > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, unlike me, you > both read and understand what is written you must know where Parashara > makes this abundantly clear. > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and also > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does not > arise at all. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that 9th/10th if without > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord even if > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For Kumbha lagna, > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th lord is > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that is why > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of each lagna and > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka status. > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. That is why > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to 9th/10th to > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like situation! > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only 9th/10th lords > > are > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and then in the > > same > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th is not > > considered > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord also owns the > > 10th > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only *9th and 10th > > lords > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th and 10th > > lords > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have erred in > > saying > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, as he owns > > the > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it be so, then > > indeed > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand what you are > > saying. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have already > > said > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the last > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered 5th > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite of > > the > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani is > > only > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord Chandra who > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding this > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It says > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th lord > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > Yogakarak > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > not > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the 10th > > > > lord > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th lord? > > > > > After all you did say "2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga" in > > > > your mail. > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own > > will not > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact > > Mars > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord > > (without > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th or > > 10th > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two FB > > is > > > > only > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I mean > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of 9th > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas should be > > > > without > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because of > > graha > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without blemish. > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be > > true. I > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that many a > > times > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the > > shlokas. > > > > > > However > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you say, > > > > though > > > > > > not > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > attention > > > > to > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who happens > > to > > > > be > > > > > > the > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you > > therefore > > > > say > > > > > > that > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th lord is > > here > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord > > can be > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of what > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has > > described > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply > > said > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and Budha > > are > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and 4th > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > Yogakarka > > > > but > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > parashara has > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we get > > > > correct > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled Yogadyaya of > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given in > > detail > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I > > wanted to > > > > be > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > Rajyoga? > > > > Or is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are > > many > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I will > > try > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a > > graha > > > > has to > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) must > > have > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. Blemish > > is > > > > for > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of lordship of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not so > > (what > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that > > Shubha > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB and > > what > > > > is > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic use > > of > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say "I mean only > > Shubha > > > > (FB) > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak" ? and then that the > > shubhas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a shubha is > > > > not so > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > comprehension > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > Shubha > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. Trikonesh > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along > > with > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has indicated > > > > many > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > directly. > > > > That > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about > > Shubha or > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, it > > has > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In that it > > > > clearly > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH". Keeping this > > in > > > > mind > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may get > > > > correct > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > their > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > what > > > > about > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we > > follow? > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you meant by > > > > Benefic > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why the > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > Shubha > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such distinction in the > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says that > > for > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and specific rule > > into > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > Shubha. I > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak(Lord of > > 9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > should be > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as > > RY) > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why for > > Mithuna > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets > > associated > > > > with > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th lord so > > > > qualifies > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as well hence > > can > > > > not > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord can not > > lead > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only Mangal. Guru > > is > > > > 6th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord Shukra > > is as > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not lead to > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd hence > > RYK > > > > along > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 12th hence > > RYK > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being 6th lord > > does > > > > not > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal is 3rd > > lord as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes 2nd > > lordship > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas Benefic > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord(Shukra for > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord(Mangal for > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord(Shukra for > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( Mangal for > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > their > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > what > > > > about > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included in > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that Laghu > > > > Parashari > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called Ududaya > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various pandits > > who > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different shloka > > amongst > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in Laghu > > Parashari > > > > from > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in most of the > > > > other > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the following > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau randhraläbhädhipau > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà labhate > > naraù > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are also > > lords of > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to (Raj) > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra Jha > > edition > > > > should > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by lord of > > the 9th > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made amply > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na > > > > shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, being > > 12th > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva shubhado > > mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh as > > well,then > > > > it > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit Sansthan > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a condition > > of 8th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says carefully, > > again. > > > > He > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed in > > Lagna or > > > > the > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not say > > about > > > > its > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine to it. > > I am > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as much is > > lost in > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä lagnädhéço'pi cet > > > > svayam > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not auspicious, > > being > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also Lord of > > lagna > > > > and > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring to any > > other > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if as well > > be > > > > trine > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So when 8th > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect badly to > > bhgaya > > > > and > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as > > functional > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you rightly > > deduce. > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is the 6th > > or the > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance following , > > if > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet is lord > > of > > > > 1st > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for Libra > > Asc, is > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet is lord > > of > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar Asc and > > > > placed > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet is lord > > of > > > > 8'th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is not bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, but > > should > > > > not > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting exceptions to > > other > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Chandrashekharji Namaste >But is this not carrying it too far? May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic Jyotish? Dont you think this way we can find something? It is interesting to that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not appriciating that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for The King there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that somebody is trying to understand universal logic for Yogakaraka and Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean both are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka where as for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th lord is 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord for these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th does not. Why? I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It seems you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already become one? Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that 5th lord can > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically indicated by > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is this not > carrying it too far? > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why Parashara > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to say so > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha lagna though > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that Mars is > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by your > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being capable of > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to differentiate > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or does the 9th > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for Simha Lagna. > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply it. > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this discussion by you, and > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same time I was > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam Pramanam " . If > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to cause hurt > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on since the days > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will continue no > matter what. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should get 5th > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you Dhanu lagna > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not Yogakaraka. > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for yogakaraka > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th lord? > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so qualifies as > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is not > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear idea what > > Parashara teaches. > > > > Again try to understand > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka status. > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as Yogakaraka > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as Yogakaraka and > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th lord > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th is > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward any > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) read > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic works uniformly > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and > > also > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > not > > > arise at all. > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic Jyotish > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish circle. > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding does > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen but I > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve Jyotish > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that 5th > > lord can > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not be yoga > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That being > > the > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara lagna > > Shukra > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, Shukra > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You have > > advanced > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka lagna. > > However > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for Karka > > lagna > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he is lord > > of a > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, unlike me, > > you > > > both read and understand what is written you must know where > > Parashara > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and > > also > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > not > > > arise at all. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that 9th/10th if > > without > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord even if > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For Kumbha lagna, > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th lord is > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that is > > why > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of each lagna > > and > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka status. > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. That is > > why > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to 9th/10th to > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like > > situation! > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only 9th/10th > > lords > > > > are > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and then in > > the > > > > same > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th is not > > > > considered > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord also owns > > the > > > > 10th > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only *9th and > > 10th > > > > lords > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th and 10th > > > > lords > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have erred in > > > > saying > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, as he > > owns > > > > the > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it be so, > > then > > > > indeed > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand what you > > are > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have > > already > > > > said > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the > > last > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > blemish. > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered > > 5th > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite > > of > > > > the > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani > > is > > > > only > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord > > Chandra who > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding > > this > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It > > says > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th > > lord > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th > > lord is > > > > not > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th > > lord? > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own > > > > will not > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord > > > > (without > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th > > or > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two > > FB > > > > is > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I > > mean > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak (Lord of > > 9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > should be > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because > > of > > > > graha > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > blemish. > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that > > many a > > > > times > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you > > say, > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > > > attention > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who > > happens > > > > to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you > > > > therefore > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th > > lord is > > > > here > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of > > what > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has > > > > described > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply > > > > said > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and > > Budha > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and > > 4th > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we > > get > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given > > in > > > > detail > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I > > > > wanted to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are > > > > many > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I > > will > > > > try > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a > > > > graha > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) > > must > > > > have > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. > > Blemish > > > > is > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > lordship of > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not > > so > > > > (what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that > > > > Shubha > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB > > and > > > > what > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic > > use > > > > of > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I mean only > > > > Shubha > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then that the > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a > > shubha is > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. > > Trikonesh > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along > > > > with > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has > > indicated > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > > > directly. > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, > > it > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In > > that it > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . Keeping > > this > > > > in > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may > > get > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > > > what > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included > > in > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you meant > > by > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why the > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such distinction > > in the > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says > > that > > > > for > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and specific > > rule > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak (Lord > > of > > > > 9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > > > should be > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified not > > as > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why for > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets > > > > associated > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th lord > > so > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as well > > hence > > > > can > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord can not > > > > lead > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only Mangal. > > Guru > > > > is > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord > > Shukra > > > > is as > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not lead > > to > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd > > hence > > > > RYK > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 12th > > hence > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being 6th > > lord > > > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal is 3rd > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes 2nd > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas > > Benefic > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord (Shukra for > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord(Mangal for > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord (Shukra for > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( Mangal for > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > > > what > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included > > in > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that Laghu > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called > > Ududaya > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various > > pandits > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different shloka > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in Laghu > > > > Parashari > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in most > > of the > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the > > following > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau randhraläbhädhipau > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà labhate > > > > naraù > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are also > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to (Raj) > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra Jha > > > > edition > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by lord of > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made amply > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, > > being > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva shubhado > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh as > > > > well,then > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit Sansthan > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a > > condition > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says carefully, > > > > again. > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed in > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not say > > > > about > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine to > > it. > > > > I am > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as much is > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä lagnädhéço'pi > > cet > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not auspicious, > > > > being > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also Lord of > > > > lagna > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring to > > any > > > > other > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if as > > well > > > > be > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So > > when 8th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect badly to > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you rightly > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is the > > 6th > > > > or the > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance > > following , > > > > if > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet is > > lord > > > > of > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for Libra > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet is > > lord > > > > of > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar > > Asc and > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet is > > lord > > > > of > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is not > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, but > > > > should > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting exceptions > > to > > > > other > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Dear Prabodh, No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a consistent position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th lords can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka and you gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the shlokas related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said that time and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of meter different words are used, by the sages. When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you chose to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being the reason for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of the 5th. Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for Simha (Leo) lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is you that want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for becoming yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of Simha lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to know as to whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of giving yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your previous averments? I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna, as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so specifically. The practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to state a principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not stated again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by classifying, which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from such malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion from whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose the term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the word Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that status, I asked you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly said that the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the yogakaraka ( Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being proposed by you), but its being the 5th lord. I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since the way I interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you want to, it would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by itself is not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. The reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically indicated that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. Could you tell me what it means by "For a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like situation!" What situation is to be avoided? I may be poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who have mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the sentence? Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that claiming not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. take care, Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekharji Namaste >But is this not carrying it too far? May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic Jyotish? Dont you think this way we can find something? It is interesting to that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not appriciating that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for The King there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that somebody is trying to understand universal logic for Yogakaraka and Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean both are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka where as for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th lord is 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord for these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th does not. Why? I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It seems you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already become one? Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that 5th lord can > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically indicated by > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is this not > carrying it too far? > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why Parashara > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to say so > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha lagna though > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that Mars is > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by your > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being capable of > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to differentiate > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or does the 9th > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for Simha Lagna. > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply it. > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this discussion by you, and > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same time I was > also taught not to go by the dictum of "Baba Vakayam Pramanam". If > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to cause hurt > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on since the days > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will continue no > matter what. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should get 5th > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you Dhanu lagna > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not Yogakaraka. > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for yogakaraka > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th lord? > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so qualifies as > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is not > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear idea what > > Parashara teaches. > > > > Again try to understand > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka status. > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as Yogakaraka > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as Yogakaraka and > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th lord > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th is > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward any > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) read > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic works uniformly > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and > > also > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > not > > > arise at all. > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic Jyotish > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish circle. > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding does > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen but I > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve Jyotish > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that 5th > > lord can > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not be yoga > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That being > > the > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara lagna > > Shukra > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, Shukra > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You have > > advanced > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka lagna. > > However > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for Karka > > lagna > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he is lord > > of a > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, unlike me, > > you > > > both read and understand what is written you must know where > > Parashara > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further and > > also > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I shall > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > not > > > arise at all. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that 9th/10th if > > without > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord even if > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For Kumbha lagna, > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th lord is > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that is > > why > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of each lagna > > and > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka status. > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. That is > > why > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to 9th/10th to > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like > > situation! > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only 9th/10th > > lords > > > > are > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and then in > > the > > > > same > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th is not > > > > considered > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord also owns > > the > > > > 10th > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only *9th and > > 10th > > > > lords > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th and 10th > > > > lords > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have erred in > > > > saying > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, as he > > owns > > > > the > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it be so, > > then > > > > indeed > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand what you > > are > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have > > already > > > > said > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In the > > last > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > blemish. > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not considered > > 5th > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak inspite > > of > > > > the > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that Shani > > is > > > > only > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord > > Chandra who > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so without > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says regarding > > this > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord but > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for Dhanur! It > > says > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and 10th > > lord > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th > > lord is > > > > not > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND the > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the 9th > > lord? > > > > > > > After all you did say "2) only 9th lord can lead to > > Rajyoga" in > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its own > > > > will not > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of fact > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th lord > > > > (without > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only 9th > > or > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these two > > FB > > > > is > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being Shubha. I > > mean > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak (Lord of > > 9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > should be > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) because > > of > > > > graha > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > blemish. > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co-lordship of > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to be > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider your > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that > > many a > > > > times > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of the > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what you > > say, > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > > > attention > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who > > happens > > > > to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will you > > > > therefore > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th > > lord is > > > > here > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th lord > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of interpretation of > > what > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara has > > > > described > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has simply > > > > said > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra and > > Budha > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th and > > 4th > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak we > > get > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has given > > in > > > > detail > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But I > > > > wanted to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, there are > > > > many > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I > > will > > > > try > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is if a > > > > graha > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or FB) > > must > > > > have > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. > > Blemish > > > > is > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean loss of > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > lordship of > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is not > > so > > > > (what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means that > > > > Shubha > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by FB > > and > > > > what > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the cryptic > > use > > > > of > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say "I mean only > > > > Shubha > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak" ? and then that the > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a > > shubha is > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. > > Trikonesh > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord along > > > > with > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has > > indicated > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > > > directly. > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything about > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific lagna, > > it > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava-Bhavesh. In > > that it > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH". Keeping > > this > > > > in > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we may > > get > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > > > what > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included > > in > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what should we > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you meant > > by > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why the > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka and > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such distinction > > in the > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says > > that > > > > for > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and specific > > rule > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak (Lord > > of > > > > 9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > > > should be > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified not > > as > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why for > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets > > > > associated > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th lord > > so > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as well > > hence > > > > can > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord can not > > > > lead > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only Mangal. > > Guru > > > > is > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord > > Shukra > > > > is as > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not lead > > to > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd > > hence > > > > RYK > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 12th > > hence > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being 6th > > lord > > > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal is 3rd > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes 2nd > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas > > Benefic > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord (Shukra for > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord(Mangal for > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord (Shukra for > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( Mangal for > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru Parashari and > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to say but > > > > what > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not included > > in > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that Laghu > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called > > Ududaya > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various > > pandits > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different shloka > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in Laghu > > > > Parashari > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in most > > of the > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the > > following > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau randhraläbhädhipau > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà labhate > > > > naraù > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are also > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to (Raj) > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra Jha > > > > edition > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by lord of > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made amply > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na > > > > > > shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, > > being > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva shubhado > > > > mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh as > > > > well,then > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit Sansthan > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a > > condition > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says carefully, > > > > again. > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed in > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not say > > > > about > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine to > > it. > > > > I am > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as much is > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä lagnädhéço'pi > > cet > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not auspicious, > > > > being > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also Lord of > > > > lagna > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring to > > any > > > > other > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if as > > well > > > > be > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So > > when 8th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect badly to > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you rightly > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is the > > 6th > > > > or the > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance > > following , > > > > if > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet is > > lord > > > > of > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for Libra > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet is > > lord > > > > of > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar > > Asc and > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet is > > lord > > > > of > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is not > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, but > > > > should > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting exceptions > > to > > > > other > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 5, 2008 Report Share Posted January 5, 2008 Chandrashekhar ji Namaste First you say > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a consistent position. Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is not demystifying! Karka Lagna I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching for a shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my BPHS is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being proposed by you) It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with Dhanu lagna. It says for Dhanu lagna Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and nja (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but not any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be yogakaraka without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. Again, when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. Tula and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. What should be ignored? I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said and can try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the question is how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one of the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) what they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has categorically said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha and Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th lord. Here you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the matter by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages need not say everything forgeting that they have already said categorically what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages need not say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages have remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my opinion we can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them explicit when they are implicit. Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and Simha lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and 10th are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can lead to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If you apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. Babagiri?? Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting that you dont accept " Baba vakyam pramanam " . Is it justified? It would have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you simply wanted to ridicule it. When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy it by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last mail I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for Dhanu and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit evertime but ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier an object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a simple solutons to all difficult answers. Bad Tone I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you wont accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss anything aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever have talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) it although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. It is easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no monetary gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk about class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and writting all these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to it was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is serving since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the other hand you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a consistent > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th lords > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka and you > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the shlokas > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said that time > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of meter > different words are used, by the sages. > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you chose > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being the reason > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of the 5th. > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for Simha (Leo) > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is you that > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for becoming > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of Simha > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to know as to > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of giving > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your previous > averments? > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna, > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so specifically. The > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to state a > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not stated > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by classifying, > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from such > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion from > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose the > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the word > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that status, I asked > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly said that > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the yogakaraka ( Only > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being proposed > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since the way I > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you want to, it > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by itself is > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. The > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically indicated > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. Could > you tell me what it means by " For a change you can appreciate to avoid > Sunday class like situation! " What situation is to be avoided? I may be > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who have > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the sentence? > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that claiming > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > take care, > Chandrashekhar. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic Jyotish? > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is interesting to > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not appriciating > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for The King > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for Yogakaraka and > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean both > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka where as > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for Dhanu > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th lord is > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord for > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th does > > not. Why? > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that we > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It seems > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already become > > one? > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that 5th lord > > can > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically indicated by > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is this not > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why > > Parashara > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to say so > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha lagna > > though > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that Mars is > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by your > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being > > capable of > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to differentiate > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or does the > > 9th > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for Simha > > Lagna. > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply it. > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this discussion by > > you, and > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same time I > > was > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam Pramanam " . If > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to cause > > hurt > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on since the > > days > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will continue no > > > matter what. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should get 5th > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you Dhanu > > lagna > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > Yogakaraka. > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for yogakaraka > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th > > lord? > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so qualifies as > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is not > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear idea > > what > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka > > status. > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as Yogakaraka > > and > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th > > lord > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th is > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward any > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) > > read > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic works > > uniformly > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further > > and > > > > also > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I > > shall > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > > > not > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic > > Jyotish > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish > > circle. > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding > > does > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen but I > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve Jyotish > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that 5th > > > > lord can > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not be > > yoga > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That > > being > > > > the > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara lagna > > > > Shukra > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, > > Shukra > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You have > > > > advanced > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka lagna. > > > > However > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for > > Karka > > > > lagna > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he is > > lord > > > > of a > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, unlike > > me, > > > > you > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must know where > > > > Parashara > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further > > and > > > > also > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I > > shall > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > > > not > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that 9th/10th if > > > > without > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord > > even if > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For Kumbha > > lagna, > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co-lording > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th > > lord is > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that > > is > > > > why > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of each > > lagna > > > > and > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka > > status. > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. > > That is > > > > why > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only > > 9th/10th > > > > lords > > > > > > are > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and then > > in > > > > the > > > > > > same > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th is not > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord also > > owns > > > > the > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only *9th > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th and > > 10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have > > erred in > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, as he > > > > owns > > > > > > the > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it be so, > > > > then > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand what > > you > > > > are > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have > > > > already > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In > > the > > > > last > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- lordship > > of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not > > considered > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak > > inspite > > > > of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that > > Shani > > > > is > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says > > regarding > > > > this > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord > > but > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for > > Dhanur! It > > > > says > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th > > > > lord is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND > > the > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the > > 9th > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to > > > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its > > own > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of > > fact > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th > > lord > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only > > 9th > > > > or > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these > > two > > > > FB > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > Shubha. I > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak > > (Lord of > > > > 9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > > > should be > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) > > because > > > > of > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- lordship > > of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to > > be > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider > > your > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that > > > > many a > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of > > the > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what > > you > > > > say, > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who > > > > happens > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will > > you > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th > > > > lord is > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th > > lord > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > interpretation of > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara > > has > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has > > simply > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra > > and > > > > Budha > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th > > and > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak > > we > > > > get > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has > > given > > > > in > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But > > I > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, > > there are > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I > > > > will > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is > > if a > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or > > FB) > > > > must > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. > > > > Blemish > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean > > loss of > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is > > not > > > > so > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means > > that > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by > > FB > > > > and > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the > > cryptic > > > > use > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I mean > > only > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then that > > the > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka > > and > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord > > along > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything > > about > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific > > lagna, > > > > it > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- Bhavesh. In > > > > that it > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . > > Keeping > > > > this > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we > > may > > > > get > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > Parashari and > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > say but > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > included > > > > in > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what > > should we > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you > > meant > > > > by > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why > > the > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka > > and > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > distinction > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says > > > > that > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and > > specific > > > > rule > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to > > being > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak > > (Lord > > > > of > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > grahas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified > > not > > > > as > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why > > for > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th > > lord > > > > so > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as > > well > > > > hence > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord > > can not > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only > > Mangal. > > > > Guru > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord > > > > Shukra > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not > > lead > > > > to > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd > > > > hence > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of > > 12th > > > > hence > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being > > 6th > > > > lord > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal > > is 3rd > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes > > 2nd > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord (Mangal > > for > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > Parashari and > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > say but > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > included > > > > in > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various > > > > pandits > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different > > shloka > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in > > Laghu > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in > > most > > > > of the > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the > > > > following > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà > > labhate > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are > > also > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to > > (Raj) > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra > > Jha > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by > > lord of > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made > > amply > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na > > > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, > > > > being > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva > > shubhado > > > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh > > as > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit > > Sansthan > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a > > > > condition > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says > > carefully, > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed > > in > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not > > say > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine > > to > > > > it. > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as > > much is > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > cet > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not > > auspicious, > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also > > Lord of > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring > > to > > > > any > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if > > as > > > > well > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect > > badly to > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you > > rightly > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is > > the > > > > 6th > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance > > > > following , > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for > > Libra > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is > > not > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, > > but > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting > > exceptions > > > > to > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 5, 2008 Report Share Posted January 5, 2008 Dear Prabodh, Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence to the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor understand. The shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in almost all editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what Parashara said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that matter, not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The proverb I quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement accepting it without support of text and tarka. About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first instance before trying to cry foul. You wrote For a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like situation!" Can you explain as to how this statement means and then how does it mean "It was just a natural reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it." Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss astrological principles? If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes I have no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of charge and that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you wanted me to tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment on this. As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of your age may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us sentences like "avoid class like situation is a clear indication that putting forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not welcome. I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where my presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am doing. Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekhar ji Namaste First you say > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a consistent position. Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is not demystifying! Karka Lagna I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching for a shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my BPHS is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being proposed by you) It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with Dhanu lagna. It says for Dhanu lagna Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and nja (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but not any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be yogakaraka without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. Again, when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. Tula and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. What should be ignored? I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said and can try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the question is how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one of the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) what they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has categorically said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha and Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th lord. Here you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the matter by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages need not say everything forgeting that they have already said categorically what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages need not say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages have remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my opinion we can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them explicit when they are implicit. Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and Simha lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and 10th are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can lead to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If you apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. Babagiri?? Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting that you dont accept "Baba vakyam pramanam". Is it justified? It would have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you simply wanted to ridicule it. When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy it by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last mail I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for Dhanu and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit evertime but ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier an object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a simple solutons to all difficult answers. Bad Tone I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you wont accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss anything aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever have talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) it although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. It is easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no monetary gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk about class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and writting all these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to it was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is serving since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the other hand you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a consistent > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th lords > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka and you > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the shlokas > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said that time > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of meter > different words are used, by the sages. > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you chose > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being the reason > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of the 5th. > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for Simha (Leo) > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is you that > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for becoming > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of Simha > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to know as to > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of giving > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your previous > averments? > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna, > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so specifically. The > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to state a > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not stated > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by classifying, > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from such > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion from > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose the > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the word > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that status, I asked > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly said that > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the yogakaraka ( Only > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being proposed > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since the way I > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you want to, it > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by itself is > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. The > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically indicated > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. Could > you tell me what it means by "For a change you can appreciate to avoid > Sunday class like situation!" What situation is to be avoided? I may be > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who have > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the sentence? > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that claiming > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > take care, > Chandrashekhar. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic Jyotish? > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is interesting to > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not appriciating > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for The King > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for Yogakaraka and > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean both > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka where as > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for Dhanu > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th lord is > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord for > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th does > > not. Why? > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that we > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It seems > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already become > > one? > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that 5th lord > > can > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically indicated by > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is this not > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why > > Parashara > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to say so > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha lagna > > though > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that Mars is > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by your > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being > > capable of > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to differentiate > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or does the > > 9th > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for Simha > > Lagna. > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply it. > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this discussion by > > you, and > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same time I > > was > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of "Baba Vakayam Pramanam". If > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to cause > > hurt > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on since the > > days > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will continue no > > > matter what. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should get 5th > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you Dhanu > > lagna > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > Yogakaraka. > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for yogakaraka > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th > > lord? > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so qualifies as > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is not > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear idea > > what > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka > > status. > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as Yogakaraka > > and > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th > > lord > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th is > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward any > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) > > read > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic works > > uniformly > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further > > and > > > > also > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I > > shall > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > > > not > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic > > Jyotish > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish > > circle. > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding > > does > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen but I > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve Jyotish > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that 5th > > > > lord can > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not be > > yoga > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That > > being > > > > the > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara lagna > > > > Shukra > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, > > Shukra > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You have > > > > advanced > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka lagna. > > > > However > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for > > Karka > > > > lagna > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he is > > lord > > > > of a > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, unlike > > me, > > > > you > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must know where > > > > Parashara > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this further > > and > > > > also > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, I > > shall > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this does > > > > not > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that 9th/10th if > > > > without > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord > > even if > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For Kumbha > > lagna, > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co-lording > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th > > lord is > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) that > > is > > > > why > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of each > > lagna > > > > and > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka > > status. > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. > > That is > > > > why > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only > > 9th/10th > > > > lords > > > > > > are > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and then > > in > > > > the > > > > > > same > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th is not > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord also > > owns > > > > the > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only *9th > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th and > > 10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have > > erred in > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, as he > > > > owns > > > > > > the > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it be so, > > > > then > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand what > > you > > > > are > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I have > > > > already > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand it. In > > the > > > > last > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again paste > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- lordship > > of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not > > considered > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak > > inspite > > > > of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says that > > Shani > > > > is > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says > > regarding > > > > this > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th lord > > but > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for > > Dhanur! It > > > > says > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is qualified as > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes 12th > > > > lord is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th AND > > the > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and the > > 9th > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > After all you did say "2) only 9th lord can lead to > > > > Rajyoga" in > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of its > > own > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a matter of > > fact > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is 10th > > lord > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that only > > 9th > > > > or > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among these > > two > > > > FB > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > Shubha. I > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak > > (Lord of > > > > 9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha grahas > > > > should be > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) > > because > > > > of > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if without > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is FB. > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- lordship > > of > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes out to > > be > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider > > your > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you that > > > > many a > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the metre of > > the > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting what > > you > > > > say, > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw your > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars who > > > > happens > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now will > > you > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the 5th > > > > lord is > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only 9th > > lord > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > interpretation of > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that Parashara > > has > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara has > > simply > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only Chandra > > and > > > > Budha > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is 5th > > and > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it to be > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas where > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and Rajyogakarak > > we > > > > get > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has > > given > > > > in > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. But > > I > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not lead to > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, > > there are > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of english. I > > > > will > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That is > > if a > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha or > > FB) > > > > must > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with blemish. > > > > Blemish > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean > > loss of > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha is > > not > > > > so > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it means > > that > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you mean by > > FB > > > > and > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the > > cryptic > > > > use > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say "I mean > > only > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak" ? and then that > > the > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean that a > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then my > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka > > and > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th lord > > along > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS has > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not expressed > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything > > about > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific > > lagna, > > > > it > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- Bhavesh. In > > > > that it > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH". > > Keeping > > > > this > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna we > > may > > > > get > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > Parashari and > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > say but > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > included > > > > in > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what > > should we > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you > > meant > > > > by > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So why > > the > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being yogakaraka > > and > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > distinction > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara says > > > > that > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and > > specific > > > > rule > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to > > being > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak > > (Lord > > > > of > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > grahas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be qualified > > not > > > > as > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is why > > for > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when gets > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is 12th > > lord > > > > so > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as > > well > > > > hence > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord > > can not > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only > > Mangal. > > > > Guru > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th lord > > > > Shukra > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does not > > lead > > > > to > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of 2nd > > > > hence > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co-lord of > > 12th > > > > hence > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but being > > 6th > > > > lord > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord Mangal > > is 3rd > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since takes > > 2nd > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara is > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are alwyas > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord (Mangal > > for > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord( > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > Parashari and > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > say but > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > included > > > > in > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute their > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware that > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also called > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from various > > > > pandits > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different > > shloka > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in > > Laghu > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in > > most > > > > of the > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is the > > > > following > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà > > labhate > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th are > > also > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to > > (Raj) > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even Deveshchandra > > Jha > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by > > lord of > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is made > > amply > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena randresho na > > > > > > > > shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not auspicious, > > > > being > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva > > shubhado > > > > > > mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is trikonesh > > as > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit > > Sansthan > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a > > > > condition > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says > > carefully, > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is placed > > in > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does not > > say > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or trine > > to > > > > it. > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as > > much is > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena randhreço na > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip cet! > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > cet > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not > > auspicious, > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also > > Lord of > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are referring > > to > > > > any > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are referring > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th lord if > > as > > > > well > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As per > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the bhagya. So > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect > > badly to > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not treated as > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you > > rightly > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another is > > the > > > > 6th > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance > > > > following , > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same planet > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus for > > Libra > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same planet > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for Aquar > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same planet > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in 9'th is > > not > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not bad, > > but > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting > > exceptions > > > > to > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2008 Report Share Posted January 7, 2008 Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence to > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & avoiding explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka & you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I asked why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t Dhanu & Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of interpreting are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your age (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am writting this) is it fair? No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand certain facts of life. Thanks a lot for your support. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence to > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor understand. The > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in almost all > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what Parashara > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that matter, > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The proverb I > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement accepting > it without support of text and tarka. > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first instance > before trying to cry foul. You wrote " " For a change you can appreciate > to avoid Sunday class like situation! " Can you explain as to how this > statement means and then how does it mean " It was just a natural > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said > it. " Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > astrological principles? > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes I have > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of charge and > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you wanted me to > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment on this. > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of your age > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us sentences > like " avoid class like situation is a clear indication that putting > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not welcome. > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where my > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am doing. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > First you say > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > consistent position. > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is not > > demystifying! > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching for a > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my BPHS > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > proposed by you) > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with Dhanu > > lagna. > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and nja > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but not > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be yogakaraka > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. Again, > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. Tula > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said and can > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the question is > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one of > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) what > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is Yogakaraka > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has categorically > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha and > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th lord. Here > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the matter > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages need not > > say everything forgeting that they have already said categorically > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages need not > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages have > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my opinion we > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them explicit > > when they are implicit. > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and Simha > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and 10th > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can lead > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If you > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting that > > you dont accept " Baba vakyam pramanam " . Is it justified? It would > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you simply > > wanted to ridicule it. > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy it > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last mail > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for Dhanu > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit evertime but > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier an > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > Bad Tone > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you wont > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss anything > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever have > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) it > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. It is > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no monetary > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk about > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and writting all > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to it > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is serving > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the other hand > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > consistent > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th > > lords > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka and > > you > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the > > shlokas > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said that > > time > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of > > meter > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you > > chose > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being the > > reason > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of the > > 5th. > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for Simha > > (Leo) > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is you > > that > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > becoming > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of > > Simha > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to know > > as to > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of > > giving > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your previous > > > averments? > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu > > lagna, > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so specifically. > > The > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to > > state a > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not stated > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > classifying, > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from such > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion from > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose > > the > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the word > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that status, I > > asked > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly said > > that > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the yogakaraka ( > > Only > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > proposed > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since the > > way I > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you want > > to, it > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by > > itself is > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. The > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > indicated > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. > > Could > > > you tell me what it means by " For a change you can appreciate to > > avoid > > > Sunday class like situation! " What situation is to be avoided? I > > may be > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who have > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the sentence? > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that > > claiming > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > take care, > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic Jyotish? > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is interesting > > to > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > appriciating > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for The > > King > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for Yogakaraka > > and > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean both > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka > > where as > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for Dhanu > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th lord is > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord for > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th > > does > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that we > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It seems > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already > > become > > > > one? > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that 5th > > lord > > > > can > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > indicated by > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is this > > not > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why > > > > Parashara > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to say > > so > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha lagna > > > > though > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that > > Mars is > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by your > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being > > > > capable of > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > differentiate > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or does the > > > > 9th > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for Simha > > > > Lagna. > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply it. > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this discussion by > > > > you, and > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same > > time I > > > > was > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam Pramanam " . > > If > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to > > cause > > > > hurt > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on since > > the > > > > days > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > continue no > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should > > get 5th > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you > > Dhanu > > > > lagna > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for > > yogakaraka > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th > > > > lord? > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > qualifies as > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is > > not > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear > > idea > > > > what > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka > > > > status. > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > Yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th > > is > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward > > any > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) > > > > read > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic works > > > > uniformly > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > further > > > > and > > > > > > also > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, > > I > > > > shall > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish > > > > circle. > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding > > > > does > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen > > but I > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve > > Jyotish > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that > > 5th > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not > > be > > > > yoga > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That > > > > being > > > > > > the > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara > > lagna > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You > > have > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka > > lagna. > > > > > > However > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for > > > > Karka > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, > > unlike > > > > me, > > > > > > you > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must know where > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > further > > > > and > > > > > > also > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, > > I > > > > shall > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord > > > > even if > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For > > Kumbha > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- lording > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) > > that > > > > is > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of > > each > > > > lagna > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka > > > > status. > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. > > > > That is > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and > > then > > > > in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th > > is not > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord > > also > > > > owns > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only > > *9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, > > as he > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it > > be so, > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand > > what > > > > you > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I > > have > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand > > it. In > > > > the > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again > > paste > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > without > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > lordship > > > > of > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not > > > > considered > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak > > > > inspite > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says > > that > > > > Shani > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says > > > > regarding > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th > > lord > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > qualified as > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes > > 12th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th > > AND > > > > the > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and > > the > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can lead to > > > > > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of > > its > > > > own > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a > > matter of > > > > fact > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that > > only > > > > 9th > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among > > these > > > > two > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > grahas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) > > > > because > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > without > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > lordship > > > > of > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes > > out to > > > > be > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider > > > > your > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you > > that > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the > > metre of > > > > the > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting > > what > > > > you > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw > > your > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars > > who > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now > > will > > > > you > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the > > 5th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only > > 9th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > Parashara > > > > has > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara > > has > > > > simply > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only > > Chandra > > > > and > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is > > 5th > > > > and > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it > > to be > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas > > where > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > Rajyogakarak > > > > we > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has > > > > given > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. > > But > > > > I > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not > > lead to > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, > > > > there are > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of > > english. I > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That > > is > > > > if a > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha > > or > > > > FB) > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with > > blemish. > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha > > is > > > > not > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it > > means > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you > > mean by > > > > FB > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the > > > > cryptic > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say " I > > mean > > > > only > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and then > > that > > > > the > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean > > that a > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then > > my > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th > > lord > > > > along > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS > > has > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not > > expressed > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything > > > > about > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific > > > > lagna, > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH " . > > > > Keeping > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna > > we > > > > may > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > > > say but > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > > > included > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute > > their > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what > > > > should we > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you > > > > meant > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So > > why > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > > > distinction > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara > > says > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and > > > > specific > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to > > > > being > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > Rajyogakarak > > > > (Lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be > > qualified > > > > not > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is > > why > > > > for > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when > > gets > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is > > 12th > > > > lord > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as > > > > well > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord > > > > can not > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th > > lord > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does > > not > > > > lead > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- lord > > of 2nd > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- lord of > > > > 12th > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but > > being > > > > 6th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord > > Mangal > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since > > takes > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara > > is > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are > > alwyas > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord > > (Mangal > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord ( > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > > > say but > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > > > included > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute > > their > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware > > that > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also > > called > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from > > various > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in > > > > most > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is > > the > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th > > are > > > > also > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > Deveshchandra > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is > > made > > > > amply > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > auspicious, > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > trikonesh > > > > as > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is > > placed > > > > in > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does > > not > > > > say > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or > > trine > > > > to > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as > > > > much is > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip > > cet! > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > referring > > > > to > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > referring > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th > > lord if > > > > as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As > > per > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > bhagya. So > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > treated as > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another > > is > > > > the > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same > > planet > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus > > for > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same > > planet > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for > > Aquar > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same > > planet > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in > > 9'th is > > > > not > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not > > bad, > > > > but > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting > > > > exceptions > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2008 Report Share Posted January 7, 2008 Prabodh Ji, Namskaar, I think chandrashekhar Ji is saying - 5'th and 9'th houses lordship 'implicitly' constitutes Yoga Karkatwa, or it's implicitly said by Parashara. Otherwise, can u clarify what qualitative differences u have seen in the end results, in case when a planet becomes yogkaraka on account of 4'th and 5'th lordship, 4'th and 9'th lordship, 5'th and 10'th lordship and 9'th and 10'th lordship. I dont know why you avoid other genuine questions as the one asked by me, which was, how Mars has been a FB for me, is that not a obvious qustion emerged in this discussions. regards, Lalit Mishra. Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh Vekhande " <amolmandar wrote: > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence > to > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & avoiding > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka & > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I asked > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t Dhanu & > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of interpreting > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your age > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > writting this) is it fair? > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand > certain facts of life. > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > Prabodh Vekhande > Jai Jai Shankar > Har Har Shankar > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence > to > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor understand. > The > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in almost > all > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > Parashara > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that > matter, > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The proverb > I > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement > accepting > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > instance > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote " " For a change you can > appreciate > > to avoid Sunday class like situation! " Can you explain as to how > this > > statement means and then how does it mean " It was just a natural > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I > said > > it. " Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > astrological principles? > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes I > have > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of > charge and > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you wanted me > to > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment on > this. > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of your > age > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > sentences > > like " avoid class like situation is a clear indication that putting > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not welcome. > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where my > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am doing. > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > consistent position. > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is > not > > > demystifying! > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > for a > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > BPHS > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > being > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with > Dhanu > > > lagna. > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and nja > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but > not > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > yogakaraka > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. Again, > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. Tula > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said and > can > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the question > is > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one of > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) > what > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > Yogakaraka > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > categorically > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha > and > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th lord. > Here > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the > matter > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages need > not > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said categorically > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages need > not > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages > have > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > opinion we > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them > explicit > > > when they are implicit. > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and Simha > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and > 10th > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can > lead > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If you > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting that > > > you dont accept " Baba vakyam pramanam " . Is it justified? It would > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you > simply > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy it > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last > mail > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for > Dhanu > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit evertime > but > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier an > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you > wont > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss anything > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever > have > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) it > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. It > is > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no > monetary > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk about > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and writting > all > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to it > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is > serving > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the other > hand > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > Chandrashekhar > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > consistent > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th > > > lords > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka > and > > > you > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the > > > shlokas > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said > that > > > time > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of > > > meter > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you > > > chose > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being > the > > > reason > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of > the > > > 5th. > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for > Simha > > > (Leo) > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is > you > > > that > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > > becoming > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of > > > Simha > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to > know > > > as to > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of > > > giving > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your > previous > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu > > > lagna, > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > specifically. > > > The > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to > > > state a > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not > stated > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > > classifying, > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from > such > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion > from > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose > > > the > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the > word > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > status, I > > > asked > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly > said > > > that > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > yogakaraka ( > > > Only > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > > proposed > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since > the > > > way I > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you > want > > > to, it > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by > > > itself is > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. > The > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > > indicated > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. > > > Could > > > > you tell me what it means by " For a change you can appreciate to > > > avoid > > > > Sunday class like situation! " What situation is to be avoided? I > > > may be > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who > have > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the > sentence? > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that > > > claiming > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic > Jyotish? > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > interesting > > > to > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > appriciating > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for > The > > > King > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > Yogakaraka > > > and > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean > both > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka > > > where as > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for > Dhanu > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th > lord is > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord > for > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th > > > does > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that > we > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It > seems > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already > > > become > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that > 5th > > > lord > > > > > can > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > > indicated by > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is > this > > > not > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to > say > > > so > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha > lagna > > > > > though > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that > > > Mars is > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by > your > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being > > > > > capable of > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > differentiate > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or > does the > > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for > Simha > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > discussion by > > > > > you, and > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same > > > time I > > > > > was > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam > Pramanam " . > > > If > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to > > > cause > > > > > hurt > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on > since > > > the > > > > > days > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > > continue no > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say > that > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should > > > get 5th > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you > > > Dhanu > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th > and 4th > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish > but is > > > not > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies > as > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given > greater > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives > clear > > > idea > > > > > what > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > Yogakaraka > > > > > status. > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > and > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic > with 5th > > > > > lord > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas > 5th > > > is > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put > forward > > > any > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as > well!) > > > > > read > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic > works > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > further > > > > > and > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > worry, > > > I > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like > this > > > does > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve > Vedic > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur > Jyotish > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are > avoiding > > > > > does > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to > happen > > > but I > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position > that > > > 5th > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can > not > > > be > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. > That > > > > > being > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for > Makara > > > lagna > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason > being, > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. > You > > > have > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka > > > lagna. > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka > for > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because > he > > > is > > > > > lord > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, > > > unlike > > > > > me, > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must know > where > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > further > > > > > and > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > worry, > > > I > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like > this > > > does > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th > lord > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For > > > Kumbha > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- > lording > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna > 10th > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > house) > > > that > > > > > is > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of > > > each > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it > Yogakaraka > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? > NO. > > > > > That is > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class > like > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand > and > > > then > > > > > in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the > 10th > > > is not > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th > lord > > > also > > > > > owns > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only > > > *9th > > > > > and > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only > 9th > > > and > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must > have > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > Rajyogakaraka, > > > as he > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If > it > > > be so, > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > understand > > > what > > > > > you > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I > > > have > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand > > > it. In > > > > > the > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once > again > > > paste > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > without > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > who is > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > > lordship > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not > > > > > considered > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > Yogakarak > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says > > > that > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th > lord > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th > lord so > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being > 12th > > > lord > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord > Surya and > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when > becomes > > > 12th > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. > Is it > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40>, > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the > 9th > > > AND > > > > > the > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th > and > > > the > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can > lead to > > > > > > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th > lord of > > > its > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a > > > matter of > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is > > > 10th > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is > that > > > only > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. > Among > > > these > > > > > two > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > Rajyogakarak > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > > grahas > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as > RY) > > > > > because > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > without > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > who is > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > > lordship > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes > > > out to > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and > reconsider > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell > you > > > that > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the > > > metre of > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting > > > what > > > > > you > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to > draw > > > your > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to > Mars > > > who > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now > > > will > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since > the > > > 5th > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that > only > > > 9th > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > > Parashara > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > lagna,Parashara > > > has > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only > > > Chandra > > > > > and > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although > Shani is > > > 5th > > > > > and > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify > it > > > to be > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas > > > where > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > we > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > titled > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > Parashara has > > > > > given > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > lords. > > > But > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > the > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS > well, > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of > > > english. I > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. > That > > > is > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th > and > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always > Shubha > > > or > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with > > > blemish. > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not > mean > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be > because of > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be > because of > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a > shubha > > > is > > > > > not > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together > it > > > means > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in > my > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you > > > mean by > > > > > FB > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age > the > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not > say " I > > > mean > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and > then > > > that > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean > > > that a > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But > then > > > my > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > yogakaraka > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my > side. > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. > 9th > > > lord > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition > BPHS > > > has > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said > anything > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing > specific > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > SmrutaH " . > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific > lagna > > > we > > > > > may > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > much to > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > not > > > > > included > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > dispute > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question > what > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to > what you > > > > > meant > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > benefic? So > > > why > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > yogakaraka > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, > Parashara > > > says > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and > > > > > specific > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > specific to > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these > Shubha > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be > > > qualified > > > > > not > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > That is > > > why > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well > when > > > gets > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is > > > 12th > > > > > lord > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of > 11th as > > > > > well > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th > lord > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is > only > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but > 10th > > > lord > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal > does > > > not > > > > > lead > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > lord > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > lord of > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but > > > being > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord > > > Mangal > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since > > > takes > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by > Parashara > > > is > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) > are > > > alwyas > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th > lord > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord > > > (Mangal > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th > lord > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord > ( > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > much to > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > not > > > > > included > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > dispute > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware > > > that > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also > > > called > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from > > > various > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > different > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > available in > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also > appears in > > > > > most > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason > is > > > the > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< > lÉte > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na > yogaà > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or > 10^th > > > are > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give > rise to > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > acquired by > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th > is > > > made > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat sa > eva > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > > trikonesh > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba > Sanskrit > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont > get a > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > Time and > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is > > > placed > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He > does > > > not > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th > or > > > trine > > > > > to > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation > (as > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > l¶axIzae=ip > > > cet! > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is > also > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > > referring > > > > > to > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > > referring > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th > > > lord if > > > > > as > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. > As > > > per > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not > affect > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > > Time and > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed > as you > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and > another > > > is > > > > > the > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > correct/enhance > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same > > > planet > > > > > is > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and > Venus > > > for > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same > > > planet > > > > > is > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc > for > > > Aquar > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same > > > planet > > > > > is > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in > > > 9'th is > > > > > not > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though > not > > > bad, > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2008 Report Share Posted January 7, 2008 Dear Lalit ji Namaste > Namskaar, I think chandrashekhar Ji is saying - 5'th and 9'th houses > lordship 'implicitly' constitutes Yoga Karkatwa, or it's implicitly > said by Parashara. Parashara in the Yogadhya has explicitly given Shubha,Yogakarak(for some lagnas),Ashubha grahas for each lagna. I am trying to find a pattern from the explicit to be applied where he opted to be implicit. In this I feel that parashara has mainly consiered 9th and 10th lords for Yogakaraka and 9th/5th for shubha. In a way parashara has treated 5th and 9th in different manner with more importance to 9th. We can see this Tul and Dhanu lagna. My point is that how can you be selective in ignoring 'explicit'? We can apply implicit when parashara is not explicit. At least this seems to be logical. > Otherwise, can u clarify what qualitative differences u have seen in > the end results, in case when a planet becomes yogkaraka on account > of 4'th and 5'th lordship, 4'th and 9'th lordship, 5'th and 10'th > lordship and 9'th and 10'th lordship. > 5th-1st-9th and 4-7-10 combination opens up several good remedies as it relates to Asthalaxmi! Will discuss later once this is settled. > I dont know why you avoid other genuine questions as the one asked by > me, which was, how Mars has been a FB for me, is that not a obvious > qustion emerged in this discussions. I have not avoided it. Why should I? But such excercise may not be correct as I am not aware of your entire life and here the point is that for Meena lagna Marsa is FB is what Parashara says. If in your case you feel that it is not so, it may be because of wrong application of principles otherwise it will prove parashara wrong! But that will not change what Parashara has said! That is why I asked you to verify again. But you said that you still feel that Mars is not FB in your case. As I have not data of your life it was not possible to verify from my side. That is why I did not respond further. I still feel that Parashasra is right and Mars influence in your life is quite obvious but this opinion is from I tried to unerstand you because of mails! It may be deceptive. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Prabodh Ji, > > Namskaar, I think chandrashekhar Ji is saying - 5'th and 9'th houses > lordship 'implicitly' constitutes Yoga Karkatwa, or it's implicitly > said by Parashara. > > Otherwise, can u clarify what qualitative differences u have seen in > the end results, in case when a planet becomes yogkaraka on account > of 4'th and 5'th lordship, 4'th and 9'th lordship, 5'th and 10'th > lordship and 9'th and 10'th lordship. > > I dont know why you avoid other genuine questions as the one asked by > me, which was, how Mars has been a FB for me, is that not a obvious > qustion emerged in this discussions. > > regards, > Lalit Mishra. > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh Vekhande " > <amolmandar@> wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > evidence > > to > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & avoiding > > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka & > > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara > > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I > asked > > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t Dhanu > & > > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of > interpreting > > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your age > > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > > writting this) is it fair? > > > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I > > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons > > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand > > certain facts of life. > > > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > evidence > > to > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor > understand. > > The > > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in > almost > > all > > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > > Parashara > > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that > > matter, > > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The > proverb > > I > > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement > > accepting > > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > > instance > > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote " " For a change you can > > appreciate > > > to avoid Sunday class like situation! " Can you explain as to how > > this > > > statement means and then how does it mean " It was just a natural > > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I > > said > > > it. " Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > > astrological principles? > > > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes I > > have > > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of > > charge and > > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you wanted > me > > to > > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment on > > this. > > > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of > your > > age > > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > > sentences > > > like " avoid class like situation is a clear indication that > putting > > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not > welcome. > > > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where > my > > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am doing. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > consistent position. > > > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is > > not > > > > demystifying! > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > for a > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > BPHS > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > shlokas > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > being > > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with > > Dhanu > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and > nja > > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but > > not > > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > > yogakaraka > > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. > Again, > > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. > Tula > > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said > and > > can > > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the > question > > is > > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one > of > > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) > > what > > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > > Yogakaraka > > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > > categorically > > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are > > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha > > and > > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th > lord. > > Here > > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the > > matter > > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages > need > > not > > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said > categorically > > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages > need > > not > > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages > > have > > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > > opinion we > > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them > > explicit > > > > when they are implicit. > > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and > Simha > > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and > > 10th > > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can > > lead > > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th > > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If > you > > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting > that > > > > you dont accept " Baba vakyam pramanam " . Is it justified? It > would > > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me > > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you > > simply > > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy > it > > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last > > mail > > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for > > Dhanu > > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for > > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit > evertime > > but > > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier > an > > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a > > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided > > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you > > wont > > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss > anything > > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever > > have > > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) > it > > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. > It > > is > > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no > > monetary > > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk > about > > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and > writting > > all > > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to > it > > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! > > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is > > serving > > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the > other > > hand > > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > consistent > > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the > 10th > > > > lords > > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be > yogakaraka > > and > > > > you > > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to > the > > > > shlokas > > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have > said > > that > > > > time > > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of > > > > meter > > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, > you > > > > chose > > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being > > the > > > > reason > > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord > of > > the > > > > 5th. > > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was > your > > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for > > Simha > > > > (Leo) > > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it > is > > you > > > > that > > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > > > becoming > > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case > of > > > > Simha > > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being > either > > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to > > know > > > > as to > > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable > of > > > > giving > > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your > > previous > > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for > Dhanu > > > > lagna, > > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > > specifically. > > > > The > > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to > > > > state a > > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not > > stated > > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > > > classifying, > > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars > from > > such > > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion > > from > > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka > (choose > > > > the > > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention > the > > word > > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > > status, I > > > > asked > > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly > > said > > > > that > > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > > yogakaraka ( > > > > Only > > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > > > proposed > > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However > since > > the > > > > way I > > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you > > want > > > > to, it > > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by > > > > itself is > > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with > Moon. > > The > > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > > > indicated > > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a > mail. > > > > Could > > > > > you tell me what it means by " For a change you can appreciate > to > > > > avoid > > > > > Sunday class like situation! " What situation is to be > avoided? I > > > > may be > > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those > who > > have > > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the > > sentence? > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that > > > > claiming > > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic > > Jyotish? > > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > > interesting > > > > to > > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > > appriciating > > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for > > The > > > > King > > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable > that > > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > > Yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I > mean > > both > > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka > > > > where as > > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th > > lord is > > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th > lord > > for > > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as > 5th > > > > does > > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction > that > > we > > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. > It > > seems > > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on > Internet! > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already > > > > become > > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept > that > > 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > can > > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > > > indicated by > > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is > > this > > > > not > > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me > why > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him > to > > say > > > > so > > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha > > lagna > > > > > > though > > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says > that > > > > Mars is > > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going > by > > your > > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as > being > > > > > > capable of > > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > > differentiate > > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or > > does the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord > for > > Simha > > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > > discussion by > > > > > > you, and > > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the > same > > > > time I > > > > > > was > > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam > > Pramanam " . > > > > If > > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one > to > > > > cause > > > > > > hurt > > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on > > since > > > > the > > > > > > days > > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > > > continue no > > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you > say > > that > > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we > should > > > > get 5th > > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given > you > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th > > and 4th > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish > > but is > > > > not > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still > qualifies > > as > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given > > greater > > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives > > clear > > > > idea > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified > as > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify > as > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic > > with 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some > lagnas > > 5th > > > > is > > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put > > forward > > > > any > > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as > > well!) > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic > > works > > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > > further > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > worry, > > > > I > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation > like > > this > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve > > Vedic > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur > > Jyotish > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are > > avoiding > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to > > happen > > > > but I > > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your > position > > that > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord > can > > not > > > > be > > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for > that. > > That > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for > > Makara > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason > > being, > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. > > You > > > > have > > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for > Karka > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the > yogakaraka > > for > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but > because > > he > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that > since, > > > > unlike > > > > > > me, > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must > know > > where > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > > further > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > worry, > > > > I > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation > like > > this > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. > 5th > > lord > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- > > lording > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka > lagna > > 10th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > house) > > > > that > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord > of > > > > each > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get > Yogakaraka? > > NO. > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance > to > > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday > class > > like > > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that > only > > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one > hand > > and > > > > then > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the > > 10th > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th > > lord > > > > also > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that > *only > > > > *9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that > only > > 9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara > must > > have > > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > > Rajyogakaraka, > > > > as he > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? > If > > it > > > > be so, > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > > understand > > > > what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte > loop! I > > > > have > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to > read/understand > > > > it. In > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once > > again > > > > paste > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > who is > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of > co- > > > > lordship > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has > not > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > > Yogakarak > > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara > says > > > > that > > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and > 10th > > lord > > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th > > lord so > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara > says > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being > > 12th > > > > lord > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak > for > > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord > > Surya and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when > > becomes > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th > diffrently. > > Is it > > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is > the > > 9th > > > > AND > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between > 5th > > and > > > > the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can > > lead to > > > > > > > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th > > lord of > > > > its > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a > > > > matter of > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it > is > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is > > that > > > > only > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. > > Among > > > > these > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier > mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to > being > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not > as > > RY) > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > who is > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of > co- > > > > lordship > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this > comes > > > > out to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and > > reconsider > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not > tell > > you > > > > that > > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the > > > > metre of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and > accepting > > > > what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like > to > > draw > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa > to > > Mars > > > > who > > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. > Now > > > > will > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka > since > > the > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying > that > > only > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > > > Parashara > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > > lagna,Parashara > > > > has > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only > > > > Chandra > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although > > Shani is > > > > 5th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not > qualify > > it > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the > Lagnas > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > titled > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > Parashara has > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > lords. > > > > But > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we > had > > the > > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can > not > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS > > well, > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can > become > > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of > > > > english. I > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be > RYK. > > That > > > > is > > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th > > and > > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always > > Shubha > > > > or > > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does > not > > mean > > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > because of > > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > because of > > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a > > shubha > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read > together > > it > > > > means > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake > in > > my > > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what > you > > > > mean by > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my > age > > the > > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not > > say " I > > > > mean > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and > > then > > > > that > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does > mean > > > > that a > > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > But > > then > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my > > side. > > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. > > 9th > > > > lord > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition > > BPHS > > > > has > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not > > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said > > anything > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing > > specific > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > > SmrutaH " . > > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific > > lagna > > > > we > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > much to > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > > not > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > dispute > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question > > what > > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to > > what you > > > > > > meant > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > > benefic? So > > > > why > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general > and > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > > specific to > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these > > Shubha > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be > > > > qualified > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > That is > > > > why > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well > > when > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and > is > > > > 12th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of > > 11th as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being > 8th > > lord > > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is > > only > > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal > > does > > > > not > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > > lord > > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > > lord of > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic > but > > > > being > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord > > > > Mangal > > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and > since > > > > takes > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by > > Parashara > > > > is > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) > > are > > > > alwyas > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th > > lord > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th > lord > > > > (Mangal > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th > > lord > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th > lord > > ( > > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > much to > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > > not > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > dispute > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time > and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are > aware > > > > that > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and > also > > > > called > > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas > from > > > > various > > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > > different > > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > > available in > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also > > appears in > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The > reason > > is > > > > the > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< > > lÉte > > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na > > yogaà > > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or > > 10^th > > > > are > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give > > rise to > > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > > acquired by > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the > 11th > > is > > > > made > > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat > sa > > eva > > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > > > trikonesh > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba > > Sanskrit > > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont > > get a > > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara > says > > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and > is > > > > placed > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. > He > > does > > > > not > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the > 9th > > or > > > > trine > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate > translation > > (as > > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen > rNØezae n > > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > > l¶axIzae=ip > > > > cet! > > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is > not > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he > is > > also > > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic > > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > > > referring > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > > > referring > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, > 8th > > > > lord if > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as > Shubha. > > As > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not > > affect > > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for > your > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed > > as you > > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and > > another > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear > Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > > correct/enhance > > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and > same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and > > Venus > > > > for > > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and > same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and > Merc > > for > > > > Aquar > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and > same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed > in > > > > 9'th is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : > Though > > not > > > > bad, > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we > should > > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be > posting > > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2008 Report Share Posted January 7, 2008 Dear Prabodh, You have held the position that 5th lord can not be a yogakaraka and only 9th and 10th can be yogakaraka and quote certain Lagnas about which Parashara commented. I have said that is not the case. I have also said that to suit meter sometimes words like yogakaraka are not explicitly used in ancient texts. I also said that Parashara says that mars is not yogakaraka because it is lord of the 10th for Karka lagna but as it is simultaneously 5th lord and asked you to find out the shloka and offer your comments. Since you do not want to take the trouble to find out what Parashara says about the 5th and the 9th bhava and also the 10th bhava. I will give the relevant shlokas for your as well as others reference. I am sure the learned will form their own opinion as to what the sage stated. 1`) tp>Swanaixpae mÙI mÙaxIzae ivze;t>, %ÉavNyaeNys<†òaE jatíeidh raJyÉakœ.39,33. yÇ k…Çaip s<yu´aE vaip taE smsÝmaE, rajv<zÉvae balae raja Évit iniítm!.39,34. tapaùsthänädhipo mantré manträdhéço viçeñataù| ubhävanyonyasandåñöau jätaçcediha räajyabhäk||39|33|| yatra kuträpi saàyuktau väpi tau samasaptamau| räjavaàçabhavo bälo räjä bhavati niçcitam||39|34|| The lord of the Tapa (9th) bhava is a minister and more especially is the lord of the Mantra (5th) bhava, their mutual aspect will bestow a kingdom on a Jataka. Even when these two are conjunct in any bhava or should they be in sama saptaka (mutually in 1/7 position or opposition), one born of a royal family will certainly become a king. 2) k…jSy kmRnet & Tvàyu´a zuÉkairta, kujasya karmanetåtvaprayuktä çubhakäritä | iÇkae[syaip net & Tve n kmeRzTvmaÇt>.12. trikoëasyäpi netåtve na karmeçatvamätrataù ||12|| Mangal (for Karka/Cancer nativity) becomes benefic not because he is only lord of the 10th (Mesha/Aries rasi) but on account of his ownership of trikona bhava (Vrishchika rasi), simultaneously. I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding any position and not trying to understand in the discussions. You are right, at my age it is indeed difficult to understand some thing as gospel truth in the name of a sage having said so when that sage has explicitly said otherwise. That is the luxury of perhaps reserved for the modern generation. Please do not try to twist things about Sunday classes. You have not yet explained what you meant by "For a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like situation!", if not to ask just to accept your interpretation of what Parashara meant without referring to Parashara? What situation were you referring to if not to frank discussions on principles of astrology that you wanted me to avoid? Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence to > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & avoiding explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka & you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I asked why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t Dhanu & Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of interpreting are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your age (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am writting this) is it fair? No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand certain facts of life. Thanks a lot for your support. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence to > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor understand. The > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in almost all > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what Parashara > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that matter, > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The proverb I > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement accepting > it without support of text and tarka. > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first instance > before trying to cry foul. You wrote For a change you can appreciate > to avoid Sunday class like situation!" Can you explain as to how this > statement means and then how does it mean "It was just a natural > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said > it." Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > astrological principles? > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes I have > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of charge and > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you wanted me to > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment on this. > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of your age > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us sentences > like "avoid class like situation is a clear indication that putting > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not welcome. > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where my > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am doing. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > First you say > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > consistent position. > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is not > > demystifying! > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching for a > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my BPHS > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > proposed by you) > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with Dhanu > > lagna. > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and nja > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but not > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be yogakaraka > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. Again, > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. Tula > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said and can > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the question is > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one of > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) what > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is Yogakaraka > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has categorically > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha and > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th lord. Here > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the matter > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages need not > > say everything forgeting that they have already said categorically > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages need not > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages have > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my opinion we > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them explicit > > when they are implicit. > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and Simha > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and 10th > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can lead > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If you > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting that > > you dont accept "Baba vakyam pramanam". Is it justified? It would > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you simply > > wanted to ridicule it. > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy it > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last mail > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for Dhanu > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit evertime but > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier an > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > Bad Tone > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you wont > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss anything > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever have > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) it > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. It is > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no monetary > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk about > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and writting all > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to it > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is serving > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the other hand > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > consistent > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th > > lords > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka and > > you > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the > > shlokas > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said that > > time > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of > > meter > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you > > chose > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being the > > reason > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of the > > 5th. > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for Simha > > (Leo) > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is you > > that > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > becoming > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of > > Simha > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to know > > as to > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of > > giving > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your previous > > > averments? > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu > > lagna, > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so specifically. > > The > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to > > state a > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not stated > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > classifying, > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from such > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion from > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose > > the > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the word > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that status, I > > asked > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly said > > that > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the yogakaraka ( > > Only > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > proposed > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since the > > way I > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you want > > to, it > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by > > itself is > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. The > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > indicated > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. > > Could > > > you tell me what it means by "For a change you can appreciate to > > avoid > > > Sunday class like situation!" What situation is to be avoided? I > > may be > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who have > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the sentence? > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that > > claiming > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > take care, > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic Jyotish? > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is interesting > > to > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > appriciating > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for The > > King > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for Yogakaraka > > and > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean both > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka > > where as > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for Dhanu > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th lord is > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord for > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th > > does > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that we > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It seems > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already > > become > > > > one? > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that 5th > > lord > > > > can > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > indicated by > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is this > > not > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why > > > > Parashara > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to say > > so > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha lagna > > > > though > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that > > Mars is > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by your > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being > > > > capable of > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > differentiate > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or does the > > > > 9th > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for Simha > > > > Lagna. > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply it. > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this discussion by > > > > you, and > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same > > time I > > > > was > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of "Baba Vakayam Pramanam". > > If > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to > > cause > > > > hurt > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on since > > the > > > > days > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > continue no > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say that > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should > > get 5th > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you > > Dhanu > > > > lagna > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for > > yogakaraka > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th and 4th > > > > lord? > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > qualifies as > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish but is > > not > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies as > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given greater > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives clear > > idea > > > > what > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to Yogakaraka > > > > status. > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > Yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic with 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas 5th > > is > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put forward > > any > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as well!) > > > > read > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic works > > > > uniformly > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > further > > > > and > > > > > > also > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, > > I > > > > shall > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve Vedic > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur Jyotish > > > > circle. > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are avoiding > > > > does > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to happen > > but I > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve > > Jyotish > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position that > > 5th > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can not > > be > > > > yoga > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. That > > > > being > > > > > > the > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for Makara > > lagna > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason being, > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. You > > have > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka > > lagna. > > > > > > However > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka for > > > > Karka > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because he > > is > > > > lord > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, > > unlike > > > > me, > > > > > > you > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must know where > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > further > > > > and > > > > > > also > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not worry, > > I > > > > shall > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like this > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th lord > > > > even if > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For > > Kumbha > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- lording > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna 10th > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house) > > that > > > > is > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of > > each > > > > lagna > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it Yogakaraka > > > > status. > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? NO. > > > > That is > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class like > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand and > > then > > > > in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the 10th > > is not > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th lord > > also > > > > owns > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only > > *9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only 9th > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must have > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only Rajyogakaraka, > > as he > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If it > > be so, > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or understand > > what > > > > you > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I > > have > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand > > it. In > > > > the > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once again > > paste > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > without > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > lordship > > > > of > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not > > > > considered > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not Yogakarak > > > > inspite > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says > > that > > > > Shani > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th lord > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th lord so > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says > > > > regarding > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being 12th > > lord > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord Surya and > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > qualified as > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when becomes > > 12th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. Is it > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the 9th > > AND > > > > the > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th and > > the > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say "2) only 9th lord can lead to > > > > > > Rajyoga" in > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th lord of > > its > > > > own > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a > > matter of > > > > fact > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is that > > only > > > > 9th > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. Among > > these > > > > two > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as Rajyogakarak > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > grahas > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as RY) > > > > because > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > without > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one who is > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > lordship > > > > of > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes > > out to > > > > be > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and reconsider > > > > your > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell you > > that > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the > > metre of > > > > the > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting > > what > > > > you > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to draw > > your > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to Mars > > who > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now > > will > > > > you > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since the > > 5th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that only > > 9th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > Parashara > > > > has > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula lagna,Parashara > > has > > > > simply > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only > > Chandra > > > > and > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although Shani is > > 5th > > > > and > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify it > > to be > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas > > where > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > Rajyogakarak > > > > we > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya titled > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa Parashara has > > > > given > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik lords. > > But > > > > I > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had the > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not > > lead to > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS well, > > > > there are > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of > > english. I > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. That > > is > > > > if a > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th and > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always Shubha > > or > > > > FB) > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with > > blemish. > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not mean > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be because of > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a shubha > > is > > > > not > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together it > > means > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in my > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you > > mean by > > > > FB > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age the > > > > cryptic > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not say "I > > mean > > > > only > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak" ? and then > > that > > > > the > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean > > that a > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But then > > my > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my side. > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. 9th > > lord > > > > along > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition BPHS > > has > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not > > expressed > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said anything > > > > about > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing specific > > > > lagna, > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH SmrutaH". > > > > Keeping > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific lagna > > we > > > > may > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > > > say but > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > > > included > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute > > their > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question what > > > > should we > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to what you > > > > meant > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional benefic? So > > why > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > > > distinction > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, Parashara > > says > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and > > > > specific > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is specific to > > > > being > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > Rajyogakarak > > > > (Lord > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be > > qualified > > > > not > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. That is > > why > > > > for > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well when > > gets > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is > > 12th > > > > lord > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of 11th as > > > > well > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th lord > > > > can not > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is only > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but 10th > > lord > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal does > > not > > > > lead > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- lord > > of 2nd > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- lord of > > > > 12th > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but > > being > > > > 6th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord > > Mangal > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since > > takes > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by Parashara > > is > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) are > > alwyas > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th lord > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord > > (Mangal > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th lord > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord ( > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing much to > > > > say but > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are not > > > > included > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can dispute > > their > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware > > that > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also > > called > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from > > various > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had different > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is available in > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also appears in > > > > most > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason is > > the > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE rNØlaÉaixpaE > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< lÉte > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na yogaà > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or 10^th > > are > > > > also > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give rise to > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > Deveshchandra > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance acquired by > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th is > > made > > > > amply > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > auspicious, > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat sa eva > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > trikonesh > > > > as > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba Sanskrit > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont get a > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is > > placed > > > > in > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He does > > not > > > > say > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th or > > trine > > > > to > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation (as > > > > much is > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata l¶axIzae=ip > > cet! > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is also > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > referring > > > > to > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > referring > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th > > lord if > > > > as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. As > > per > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > bhagya. So > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not affect > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > treated as > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed as you > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and another > > is > > > > the > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. correct/enhance > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same > > planet > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and Venus > > for > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same > > planet > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc for > > Aquar > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same > > planet > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in > > 9'th is > > > > not > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though not > > bad, > > > > but > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting > > > > exceptions > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Chandrashekahr ji Namaste Now you are going for everybody. OK. But if you read my earlier mails I made it very clear way back that I am only trying to understand the Yogadhya of BPHS where Parashara has described Shubhashuba and Yogakaraka grahas for each lagna. I once even said that I understand the importance of 5th as Trikonesh and its role in Rajyogakaraka as given in Rajyogadya in BPHS. I did not want to comment on that. Since you are selective in your reading mails, you can now quote a shloka from Rajyogadya. To prove my point I paste from my previous mails > > > > we > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > titled > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > Parashara has given in detail graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > lords. But I > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > the discussions. So there is no point in ignoring what has already been said. I made it clear to keep discussions with reference to Yogadhayaya and you exactly ignored this. I again say that try to keep discussions to Yogadhya of BPHS and quote from that portions where parashara has enumerated Shubha(FB), Ashubha(FM) and Yogakaraka(YK). First BPHS talks about Shubha then Yogakaraka and then Rajyogakaraka. In my opinion there is clear distiction among these, taht is why it is given in that order. For your ready ref. I again try to narrate the course of discussions in this thread. 1)The thread started because of Shri Lalit put a topic regarding 8th lord and its shubhatva. 2)You replied with the statement that if a graha owns a good house along with 6th or 8th it is not considered as functional benefic. 3)To that I replied that 8th lord if lord of good house is considered as shubha by Parashara. 4)Possibly you did not like mail from me. So you ridiculed my post by saying " Read what Parashara says carefully, again " and quoted shloka from your BPHS. 5) To that I had to tell you that I wrote after reading and understanding BPHS. I then quote shlokas from BPHS. 6) Then you gave a twist. The shloka that you said to be from BPHS turned out to be from LaghuParashari! You even advocated use of LP over BPHS. Possibly that was the first instance where a Jyotish Guru was advocating LP over BPHS. Since it was from a Guru nobody took it by surprised. But I was indeed surprised! I even asked what will happen to those topics which are not in LP but are in BPHS. You avoided that! 7) After that I tried to explain my position(even trying till date!). 8) You got confused with use of abrivations and posibly lost the track from there onwards as you kept silent on LP and BPHS issue. 9)I tried to tell you that I am only refereing to the shlokas from 35th adhaya of BPHS where parashara has described each lagna in detail. 10) You ignored this statement/mail and continued with your topic. 11....) After that I tried and tried and tried but you possibly lost the interest and expressed your anger/frustration by opting out of my class as if you were attending my class for me and not for VEDIC JYOTISH. That was really sad. 12)After reading so many mails on one topic from me if you still feel that I do not want to take trouble to read I am sorry for that. I even tried to explain pointwise for your easy understanding but at your age you can always make any statements and you expect everybody to accept it(because you are at 'your age'). Offcourse, many here will accept you because of your status. But try to read my mails from start and you will find that I have not changed my position and categorically said that I am only trying to understand shlokas from Yogadhya in which Parashara has described each lagna in detail. I even gave the shloka for Karka Lagna where you were banking much. I again give it for you. Please tell me after reading that shloka where parashara has said about Mars being Yogakaraka because of 5th instead of 10th. > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > for a > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > BPHS > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. Why this way?? > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding any > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. Why are you asking others to intervene? Is it not gathering support? Anyway, nothing is lost. I again say that please try to restrict discussions to those shlokas where parashara has described Shubha (FB), Ashubha(FM), and Yogakaraka(YK) on the request of Maitriya. From those shlokas I hold follwoing things. 1)5th and 9th is always Shubha(FB) 1.1 9th is always Shubha but 5th gets some blemish in case of Kanya. 2) 9th and 10th lords can become Yogakaraka. Here Parashara has avoided 5th lords. Ex. Tul and Dhanu lagnas will say that parashara has treated 5th and 9th differently. I asked this to you but you avoided it. 3) If 9th or 10th not blemished because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11 can become yogakaraka. So this for all to see and read what way discussions went. I again request you to read this mail in good spirit and clarify. As regards to Sunday class, I am sure you wanted to create problem for me and thats why you opted out from my class. I do not have habit of twisting the thngs. I know that you dont want to listen(i.e. be in class again) that is why I prefer to be silent on the statement " For a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like situation! " . Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar P.S: Plese give the name of chapter for the second shloka. The one which talks about Kuja. I did not find it in BPHS. Now please dont say that I dont want to take trouble of finding it. Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > You have held the position that 5th lord can not be a yogakaraka and > only 9th and 10th can be yogakaraka and quote certain Lagnas about which > Parashara commented. I have said that is not the case. I have also said > that to suit meter sometimes words like yogakaraka are not explicitly > used in ancient texts. I also said that Parashara says that mars is not > yogakaraka because it is lord of the 10th for Karka lagna but as it is > simultaneously 5th lord and asked you to find out the shloka and offer > your comments. Since you do not want to take the trouble to find out > what Parashara says about the 5th and the 9th bhava and also the 10th > bhava. I will give the relevant shlokas for your as well as others > reference. I am sure the learned will form their own opinion as to what > the sage stated. > > 1`) > > tp>Swanaixpae mÙI mÙaxIzae ivze;t>, > > %ÉavNyaeNys<+òaE jatíeidh raJyÉakoe.39,33. > > yÇ k...Çaip s<yu´aE vaip taE smsÝmaE, > > rajv<zÉvae balae raja Évit iniítm!.39,34. > > tapaùsthänädhipo mantré manträdhéço viçeñataù| > > ubhävanyonyasandåñöau jätaçcediha räajyabhäk||39|33|| > > yatra kuträpi saàyuktau väpi tau samasaptamau| > > räjavaàçabhavo bälo räjä bhavati niçcitam||39|34|| > > /_The lord of the Tapa (9^th ) bhava is a minister and *more especially > is the lord of the Mantra (5^th ) bhava*, their mutual aspect will > bestow a kingdom on a Jataka. Even when these two are conjunct in any > bhava or should they be in sama saptaka (mutually in 1/7 position or > opposition), one born of a royal family will certainly become a king._/ > > > 2) > > k...jSy kmRnet & Tvàyu´a zuÉkairta, > > kujasya karmanetåtvaprayuktä çubhakäritä | > > iÇkae[syaip net & Tve n kmeRzTvmaÇt>.12. > > trikoëasyäpi netåtve na karmeçatvamätrataù ||12|| > > /_Mangal (for Karka/Cancer nativity) becomes benefic not because he is > only lord of the 10^th (Mesha/Aries rasi) but on account of his > ownership of trikona bhava (Vrishchika rasi), simultaneously._/ > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding any > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. You are right, > at my age it is indeed difficult to understand some thing as gospel > truth in the name of a sage having said so when that sage has explicitly > said otherwise. That is the luxury of perhaps reserved for the modern > generation. > > Please do not try to twist things about Sunday classes. You have not yet > explained what you meant by " For a change you can appreciate to avoid > Sunday class like situation! " , if not to ask just to accept your > interpretation of what Parashara meant without referring to Parashara? > What situation were you referring to if not to frank discussions on > principles of astrology that you wanted me to avoid? > > Chandrashekhar. > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence > > to > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & avoiding > > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka & > > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara > > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I asked > > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t Dhanu & > > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of interpreting > > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your age > > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > > writting this) is it fair? > > > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I > > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons > > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand > > certain facts of life. > > > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence > > to > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor understand. > > The > > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in almost > > all > > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > > Parashara > > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that > > matter, > > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The proverb > > I > > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement > > accepting > > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > > instance > > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote " " For a change you can > > appreciate > > > to avoid Sunday class like situation! " Can you explain as to how > > this > > > statement means and then how does it mean " It was just a natural > > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I > > said > > > it. " Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > > astrological principles? > > > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes I > > have > > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of > > charge and > > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you wanted me > > to > > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment on > > this. > > > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of your > > age > > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > > sentences > > > like " avoid class like situation is a clear indication that putting > > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not welcome. > > > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where my > > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am doing. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > consistent position. > > > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is > > not > > > > demystifying! > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > for a > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > BPHS > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > being > > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with > > Dhanu > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and nja > > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but > > not > > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > > yogakaraka > > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. Again, > > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. Tula > > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said and > > can > > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the question > > is > > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one of > > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) > > what > > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > > Yogakaraka > > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > > categorically > > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are > > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha > > and > > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th lord. > > Here > > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the > > matter > > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages need > > not > > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said categorically > > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages need > > not > > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages > > have > > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > > opinion we > > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them > > explicit > > > > when they are implicit. > > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and Simha > > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and > > 10th > > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can > > lead > > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th > > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If you > > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting that > > > > you dont accept " Baba vakyam pramanam " . Is it justified? It would > > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me > > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you > > simply > > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy it > > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last > > mail > > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for > > Dhanu > > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for > > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit evertime > > but > > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier an > > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a > > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided > > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you > > wont > > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss anything > > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever > > have > > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) it > > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. It > > is > > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no > > monetary > > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk about > > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and writting > > all > > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to it > > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! > > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is > > serving > > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the other > > hand > > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > consistent > > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th > > > > lords > > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka > > and > > > > you > > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the > > > > shlokas > > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said > > that > > > > time > > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of > > > > meter > > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you > > > > chose > > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being > > the > > > > reason > > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of > > the > > > > 5th. > > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your > > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for > > Simha > > > > (Leo) > > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is > > you > > > > that > > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > > > becoming > > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of > > > > Simha > > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either > > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to > > know > > > > as to > > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of > > > > giving > > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your > > previous > > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu > > > > lagna, > > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > > specifically. > > > > The > > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to > > > > state a > > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not > > stated > > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > > > classifying, > > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from > > such > > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion > > from > > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose > > > > the > > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the > > word > > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > > status, I > > > > asked > > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly > > said > > > > that > > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > > yogakaraka ( > > > > Only > > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > > > proposed > > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since > > the > > > > way I > > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you > > want > > > > to, it > > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by > > > > itself is > > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. > > The > > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > > > indicated > > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. > > > > Could > > > > > you tell me what it means by " For a change you can appreciate to > > > > avoid > > > > > Sunday class like situation! " What situation is to be avoided? I > > > > may be > > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who > > have > > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the > > sentence? > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that > > > > claiming > > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic > > Jyotish? > > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > > interesting > > > > to > > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > > appriciating > > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for > > The > > > > King > > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that > > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > > Yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean > > both > > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka > > > > where as > > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th > > lord is > > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord > > for > > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th > > > > does > > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that > > we > > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It > > seems > > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already > > > > become > > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that > > 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > can > > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > > > indicated by > > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is > > this > > > > not > > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to > > say > > > > so > > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha > > lagna > > > > > > though > > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that > > > > Mars is > > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by > > your > > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being > > > > > > capable of > > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > > differentiate > > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or > > does the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for > > Simha > > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > > discussion by > > > > > > you, and > > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same > > > > time I > > > > > > was > > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam > > Pramanam " . > > > > If > > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to > > > > cause > > > > > > hurt > > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on > > since > > > > the > > > > > > days > > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > > > continue no > > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say > > that > > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should > > > > get 5th > > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th > > and 4th > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish > > but is > > > > not > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies > > as > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given > > greater > > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives > > clear > > > > idea > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic > > with 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas > > 5th > > > > is > > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put > > forward > > > > any > > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as > > well!) > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic > > works > > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > > further > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > worry, > > > > I > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like > > this > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve > > Vedic > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur > > Jyotish > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are > > avoiding > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to > > happen > > > > but I > > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position > > that > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can > > not > > > > be > > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. > > That > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for > > Makara > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason > > being, > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. > > You > > > > have > > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka > > for > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because > > he > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, > > > > unlike > > > > > > me, > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must know > > where > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > > further > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > worry, > > > > I > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like > > this > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th > > lord > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- > > lording > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna > > 10th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > house) > > > > that > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of > > > > each > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? > > NO. > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to > > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class > > like > > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only > > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand > > and > > > > then > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the > > 10th > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th > > lord > > > > also > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only > > > > *9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only > > 9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must > > have > > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > > Rajyogakaraka, > > > > as he > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If > > it > > > > be so, > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > > understand > > > > what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I > > > > have > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand > > > > it. In > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once > > again > > > > paste > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > who is > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > > > lordship > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > > Yogakarak > > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says > > > > that > > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th > > lord > > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th > > lord so > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being > > 12th > > > > lord > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for > > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord > > Surya and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when > > becomes > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. > > Is it > > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the > > 9th > > > > AND > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th > > and > > > > the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can > > lead to > > > > > > > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th > > lord of > > > > its > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a > > > > matter of > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is > > that > > > > only > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. > > Among > > > > these > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as > > RY) > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > who is > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > > > lordship > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes > > > > out to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and > > reconsider > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell > > you > > > > that > > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the > > > > metre of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting > > > > what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to > > draw > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to > > Mars > > > > who > > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now > > > > will > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since > > the > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that > > only > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > > > Parashara > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > > lagna,Parashara > > > > has > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only > > > > Chandra > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although > > Shani is > > > > 5th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify > > it > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > titled > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > Parashara has > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > lords. > > > > But > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > the > > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS > > well, > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of > > > > english. I > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. > > That > > > > is > > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th > > and > > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always > > Shubha > > > > or > > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not > > mean > > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > because of > > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > because of > > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a > > shubha > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together > > it > > > > means > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in > > my > > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you > > > > mean by > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age > > the > > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not > > say " I > > > > mean > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and > > then > > > > that > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean > > > > that a > > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But > > then > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my > > side. > > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. > > 9th > > > > lord > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition > > BPHS > > > > has > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not > > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said > > anything > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing > > specific > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > > SmrutaH " . > > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific > > lagna > > > > we > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > much to > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > > not > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > dispute > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question > > what > > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to > > what you > > > > > > meant > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > > benefic? So > > > > why > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > > specific to > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these > > Shubha > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be > > > > qualified > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > That is > > > > why > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well > > when > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is > > > > 12th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of > > 11th as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th > > lord > > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is > > only > > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal > > does > > > > not > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > > lord > > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > > lord of > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but > > > > being > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord > > > > Mangal > > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since > > > > takes > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by > > Parashara > > > > is > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) > > are > > > > alwyas > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th > > lord > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord > > > > (Mangal > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th > > lord > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord > > ( > > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > much to > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > > not > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > dispute > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware > > > > that > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also > > > > called > > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from > > > > various > > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > > different > > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > > available in > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also > > appears in > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason > > is > > > > the > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< > > lÉte > > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na > > yogaà > > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or > > 10^th > > > > are > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give > > rise to > > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > > acquired by > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th > > is > > > > made > > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat sa > > eva > > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > > > trikonesh > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba > > Sanskrit > > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont > > get a > > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says > > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is > > > > placed > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He > > does > > > > not > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th > > or > > > > trine > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation > > (as > > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n > > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > > l¶axIzae=ip > > > > cet! > > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is > > also > > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic > > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > > > referring > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > > > referring > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th > > > > lord if > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. > > As > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not > > affect > > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed > > as you > > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and > > another > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > > correct/enhance > > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and > > Venus > > > > for > > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc > > for > > > > Aquar > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in > > > > 9'th is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though > > not > > > > bad, > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should > > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting > > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Dear Prabodh, I think this is leading nowhere. Even when confronted with a shloka from Parashara telling clearly that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its ownership of 10th bhava but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord, you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th lord can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. You also want to give yogakaraka status to 9th lord though Parashara clearly talks about the 5th being more important than the 9th. You want to appear to be bent on proving the unprovable. So be it. I am sure those who read what is being said will form their own opinion on what is the factual position. By the way, if you think Laghu Parashari is not written or given by Parashara then I am sure you must not also be thinking much of Sitaram Jha who is credited with being amongst the first to locate a manuscript of Parashari ( now called BPHS) and who though about there having to be a manuscript in existence that is larger than Laghu Parashari as in his opinion it was necessary that Laghu Parashari is only a part of what ought to be a larger text. This is really strange for one who swears by Parashara. Anyway, if you go through enough editions of BPHS you will find that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of BPHS. I could even give you the shloka and the adhyaaya with the edition of BPHS in which the shloka appears, but do not think that is going to serve any purpose as you have already made up your mind that what ever does not suit your theory can not have been written or told by Parashara. Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekahr ji Namaste Now you are going for everybody. OK. But if you read my earlier mails I made it very clear way back that I am only trying to understand the Yogadhya of BPHS where Parashara has described Shubhashuba and Yogakaraka grahas for each lagna. I once even said that I understand the importance of 5th as Trikonesh and its role in Rajyogakaraka as given in Rajyogadya in BPHS. I did not want to comment on that. Since you are selective in your reading mails, you can now quote a shloka from Rajyogadya. To prove my point I paste from my previous mails > > > > we > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > titled > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > Parashara has given in detail graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > lords. But I > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > the discussions. So there is no point in ignoring what has already been said. I made it clear to keep discussions with reference to Yogadhayaya and you exactly ignored this. I again say that try to keep discussions to Yogadhya of BPHS and quote from that portions where parashara has enumerated Shubha(FB), Ashubha(FM) and Yogakaraka(YK). First BPHS talks about Shubha then Yogakaraka and then Rajyogakaraka. In my opinion there is clear distiction among these, taht is why it is given in that order. For your ready ref. I again try to narrate the course of discussions in this thread. 1)The thread started because of Shri Lalit put a topic regarding 8th lord and its shubhatva. 2)You replied with the statement that if a graha owns a good house along with 6th or 8th it is not considered as functional benefic. 3)To that I replied that 8th lord if lord of good house is considered as shubha by Parashara. 4)Possibly you did not like mail from me. So you ridiculed my post by saying "Read what Parashara says carefully, again" and quoted shloka from your BPHS. 5) To that I had to tell you that I wrote after reading and understanding BPHS. I then quote shlokas from BPHS. 6) Then you gave a twist. The shloka that you said to be from BPHS turned out to be from LaghuParashari! You even advocated use of LP over BPHS. Possibly that was the first instance where a Jyotish Guru was advocating LP over BPHS. Since it was from a Guru nobody took it by surprised. But I was indeed surprised! I even asked what will happen to those topics which are not in LP but are in BPHS. You avoided that! 7) After that I tried to explain my position(even trying till date!). 8) You got confused with use of abrivations and posibly lost the track from there onwards as you kept silent on LP and BPHS issue. 9)I tried to tell you that I am only refereing to the shlokas from 35th adhaya of BPHS where parashara has described each lagna in detail. 10) You ignored this statement/mail and continued with your topic. 11....) After that I tried and tried and tried but you possibly lost the interest and expressed your anger/frustration by opting out of my class as if you were attending my class for me and not for VEDIC JYOTISH. That was really sad. 12)After reading so many mails on one topic from me if you still feel that I do not want to take trouble to read I am sorry for that. I even tried to explain pointwise for your easy understanding but at your age you can always make any statements and you expect everybody to accept it(because you are at 'your age'). Offcourse, many here will accept you because of your status. But try to read my mails from start and you will find that I have not changed my position and categorically said that I am only trying to understand shlokas from Yogadhya in which Parashara has described each lagna in detail. I even gave the shloka for Karka Lagna where you were banking much. I again give it for you. Please tell me after reading that shloka where parashara has said about Mars being Yogakaraka because of 5th instead of 10th. > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > for a > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > BPHS > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. Why this way?? > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding any > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. Why are you asking others to intervene? Is it not gathering support? Anyway, nothing is lost. I again say that please try to restrict discussions to those shlokas where parashara has described Shubha (FB), Ashubha(FM), and Yogakaraka(YK) on the request of Maitriya. >From those shlokas I hold follwoing things. 1)5th and 9th is always Shubha(FB) 1.1 9th is always Shubha but 5th gets some blemish in case of Kanya. 2) 9th and 10th lords can become Yogakaraka. Here Parashara has avoided 5th lords. Ex. Tul and Dhanu lagnas will say that parashara has treated 5th and 9th differently. I asked this to you but you avoided it. 3) If 9th or 10th not blemished because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11 can become yogakaraka. So this for all to see and read what way discussions went. I again request you to read this mail in good spirit and clarify. As regards to Sunday class, I am sure you wanted to create problem for me and thats why you opted out from my class. I do not have habit of twisting the thngs. I know that you dont want to listen(i.e. be in class again) that is why I prefer to be silent on the statement "For a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like situation!". Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar P.S: Plese give the name of chapter for the second shloka. The one which talks about Kuja. I did not find it in BPHS. Now please dont say that I dont want to take trouble of finding it. Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > You have held the position that 5th lord can not be a yogakaraka and > only 9th and 10th can be yogakaraka and quote certain Lagnas about which > Parashara commented. I have said that is not the case. I have also said > that to suit meter sometimes words like yogakaraka are not explicitly > used in ancient texts. I also said that Parashara says that mars is not > yogakaraka because it is lord of the 10th for Karka lagna but as it is > simultaneously 5th lord and asked you to find out the shloka and offer > your comments. Since you do not want to take the trouble to find out > what Parashara says about the 5th and the 9th bhava and also the 10th > bhava. I will give the relevant shlokas for your as well as others > reference. I am sure the learned will form their own opinion as to what > the sage stated. > > 1`) > > tp>Swanaixpae mÙI mÙaxIzae ivze;t>, > > %ÉavNyaeNys<+òaE jatíeidh raJyÉakoe.39,33. > > yÇ k...Çaip s<yu´aE vaip taE smsÝmaE, > > rajv<zÉvae balae raja Évit iniítm!.39,34. > > tapaùsthänädhipo mantré manträdhéço viçeñataù| > > ubhävanyonyasandåñöau jätaçcediha räajyabhäk||39|33|| > > yatra kuträpi saàyuktau väpi tau samasaptamau| > > räjavaàçabhavo bälo räjä bhavati niçcitam||39|34|| > > /_The lord of the Tapa (9^th ) bhava is a minister and *more especially > is the lord of the Mantra (5^th ) bhava*, their mutual aspect will > bestow a kingdom on a Jataka. Even when these two are conjunct in any > bhava or should they be in sama saptaka (mutually in 1/7 position or > opposition), one born of a royal family will certainly become a king._/ > > > 2) > > k...jSy kmRnet & Tvàyu´a zuÉkairta, > > kujasya karmanetåtvaprayuktä çubhakäritä | > > iÇkae[syaip net & Tve n kmeRzTvmaÇt>.12. > > trikoëasyäpi netåtve na karmeçatvamätrataù ||12|| > > /_Mangal (for Karka/Cancer nativity) becomes benefic not because he is > only lord of the 10^th (Mesha/Aries rasi) but on account of his > ownership of trikona bhava (Vrishchika rasi), simultaneously._/ > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding any > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. You are right, > at my age it is indeed difficult to understand some thing as gospel > truth in the name of a sage having said so when that sage has explicitly > said otherwise. That is the luxury of perhaps reserved for the modern > generation. > > Please do not try to twist things about Sunday classes. You have not yet > explained what you meant by "For a change you can appreciate to avoid > Sunday class like situation!", if not to ask just to accept your > interpretation of what Parashara meant without referring to Parashara? > What situation were you referring to if not to frank discussions on > principles of astrology that you wanted me to avoid? > > Chandrashekhar. > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence > > to > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & avoiding > > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka & > > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara > > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I asked > > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t Dhanu & > > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of interpreting > > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your age > > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > > writting this) is it fair? > > > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I > > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons > > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand > > certain facts of life. > > > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting evidence > > to > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor understand. > > The > > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in almost > > all > > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > > Parashara > > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that > > matter, > > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The proverb > > I > > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement > > accepting > > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > > instance > > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote For a change you can > > appreciate > > > to avoid Sunday class like situation!" Can you explain as to how > > this > > > statement means and then how does it mean "It was just a natural > > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I > > said > > > it." Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > > astrological principles? > > > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes I > > have > > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of > > charge and > > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you wanted me > > to > > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment on > > this. > > > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of your > > age > > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > > sentences > > > like "avoid class like situation is a clear indication that putting > > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not welcome. > > > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where my > > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am doing. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > consistent position. > > > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it is > > not > > > > demystifying! > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > for a > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is Yogakaraka > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > BPHS > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these shlokas > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > being > > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting with > > Dhanu > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and nja > > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord but > > not > > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > > yogakaraka > > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. Again, > > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. Tula > > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said and > > can > > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the question > > is > > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, one of > > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) > > what > > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > > Yogakaraka > > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > > categorically > > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas are > > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as Shubha > > and > > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th lord. > > Here > > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the > > matter > > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages need > > not > > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said categorically > > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages need > > not > > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where sages > > have > > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > > opinion we > > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them > > explicit > > > > when they are implicit. > > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and Simha > > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and > > 10th > > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha can > > lead > > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding 3,6,8,11th > > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! If you > > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting that > > > > you dont accept "Baba vakyam pramanam". Is it justified? It would > > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by me > > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you > > simply > > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or simplfy it > > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the last > > mail > > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for > > Dhanu > > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted for > > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit evertime > > but > > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes querier an > > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers get a > > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already decided > > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, you > > wont > > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss anything > > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever > > have > > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the clss) it > > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without fail. It > > is > > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no > > monetary > > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk about > > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and writting > > all > > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference to it > > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in that! > > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is > > serving > > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the other > > hand > > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > consistent > > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the 10th > > > > lords > > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be yogakaraka > > and > > > > you > > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to the > > > > shlokas > > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have said > > that > > > > time > > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake of > > > > meter > > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented upon, you > > > > chose > > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not being > > the > > > > reason > > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its lord of > > the > > > > 5th. > > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was your > > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for > > Simha > > > > (Leo) > > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it is > > you > > > > that > > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > > > becoming > > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the case of > > > > Simha > > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being either > > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to > > know > > > > as to > > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as capable of > > > > giving > > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your > > previous > > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for Dhanu > > > > lagna, > > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > > specifically. > > > > The > > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is to > > > > state a > > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not > > stated > > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > > > classifying, > > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars from > > such > > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not feel > > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the discussion > > from > > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka (choose > > > > the > > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention the > > word > > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > > status, I > > > > asked > > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has clearly > > said > > > > that > > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > > yogakaraka ( > > > > Only > > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was being > > > > proposed > > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However since > > the > > > > way I > > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you > > want > > > > to, it > > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury by > > > > itself is > > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with Moon. > > The > > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > > > indicated > > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a mail. > > > > Could > > > > > you tell me what it means by "For a change you can appreciate to > > > > avoid > > > > > Sunday class like situation!" What situation is to be avoided? I > > > > may be > > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those who > > have > > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the > > sentence? > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating that > > > > claiming > > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic > > Jyotish? > > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > > interesting > > > > to > > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > > appriciating > > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that for > > The > > > > King > > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable that > > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > > Yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I mean > > both > > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not Yogakaraka > > > > where as > > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th > > lord is > > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th lord > > for > > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where as 5th > > > > does > > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction that > > we > > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. It > > seems > > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on Internet! > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I already > > > > become > > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept that > > 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > can > > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > > > indicated by > > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is > > this > > > > not > > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell me why > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him to > > say > > > > so > > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for Simha > > lagna > > > > > > though > > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says that > > > > Mars is > > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. Going by > > your > > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as being > > > > > > capable of > > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > > differentiate > > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or > > does the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord for > > Simha > > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you apply > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > > discussion by > > > > > > you, and > > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the same > > > > time I > > > > > > was > > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of "Baba Vakayam > > Pramanam". > > > > If > > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be one to > > > > cause > > > > > > hurt > > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going on > > since > > > > the > > > > > > days > > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > > > continue no > > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you say > > that > > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we should > > > > get 5th > > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given you > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is not > > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria for > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th > > and 4th > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish > > but is > > > > not > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still qualifies > > as > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given > > greater > > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives > > clear > > > > idea > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have qualified as > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 qualify as > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic > > with 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some lagnas > > 5th > > > > is > > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put > > forward > > > > any > > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others as > > well!) > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic > > works > > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > > further > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > worry, > > > > I > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like > > this > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve > > Vedic > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur > > Jyotish > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are > > avoiding > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to > > happen > > > > but I > > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to serve > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your position > > that > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord can > > not > > > > be > > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for that. > > That > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for > > Makara > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the reason > > being, > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th lord. > > You > > > > have > > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for Karka > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the yogakaraka > > for > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but because > > he > > > > is > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that since, > > > > unlike > > > > > > me, > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must know > > where > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss this > > > > further > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > worry, > > > > I > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation like > > this > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. 5th > > lord > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. For > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- > > lording > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka lagna > > 10th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > house) > > > > that > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th lord of > > > > each > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get Yogakaraka? > > NO. > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special importance to > > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday class > > like > > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that only > > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one hand > > and > > > > then > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the > > 10th > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th > > lord > > > > also > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that *only > > > > *9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that only > > 9th > > > > and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara must > > have > > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > > Rajyogakaraka, > > > > as he > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? If > > it > > > > be so, > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > > understand > > > > what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte loop! I > > > > have > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to read/understand > > > > it. In > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once > > again > > > > paste > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > who is > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > > > lordship > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara has not > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > > Yogakarak > > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara says > > > > that > > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and 10th > > lord > > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th > > lord so > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara says > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish being > > 12th > > > > lord > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as Yogakarak for > > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord > > Surya and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when > > becomes > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th diffrently. > > Is it > > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is the > > 9th > > > > AND > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between 5th > > and > > > > the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say "2) only 9th lord can > > lead to > > > > > > > > Rajyoga" in > > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th > > lord of > > > > its > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As a > > > > matter of > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because it is > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying is > > that > > > > only > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. > > Among > > > > these > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to being > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these Shubha > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not as > > RY) > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK if > > > > without > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > who is > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of co- > > > > lordship > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this comes > > > > out to > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and > > reconsider > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not tell > > you > > > > that > > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with the > > > > metre of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and accepting > > > > what > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like to > > draw > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa to > > Mars > > > > who > > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that lagna. Now > > > > will > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka since > > the > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying that > > only > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > > > Parashara > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > > lagna,Parashara > > > > has > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but only > > > > Chandra > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although > > Shani is > > > > 5th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not qualify > > it > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha(FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the Lagnas > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > titled > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > Parashara has > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > lords. > > > > But > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > the > > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th can not > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS > > well, > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can become > > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality of > > > > english. I > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be RYK. > > That > > > > is > > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of 5th > > and > > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always > > Shubha > > > > or > > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be with > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does not > > mean > > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > because of > > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > because of > > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a > > shubha > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read together > > it > > > > means > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no mistake in > > my > > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what you > > > > mean by > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my age > > the > > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not > > say "I > > > > mean > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak" ? and > > then > > > > that > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does mean > > > > that a > > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. But > > then > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from my > > side. > > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not YK. > > 9th > > > > lord > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid repetition > > BPHS > > > > has > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though not > > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said > > anything > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing > > specific > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > > SmrutaH". > > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific > > lagna > > > > we > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > much to > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > > not > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > dispute > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this question > > what > > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to > > what you > > > > > > meant > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > > benefic? So > > > > why > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any such > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take general and > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > > specific to > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these > > Shubha > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there(to be > > > > qualified > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > That is > > > > why > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well > > when > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha and is > > > > 12th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of > > 11th as > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being 8th > > lord > > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is > > only > > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with Mangal > > does > > > > not > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > > lord > > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and co- > > lord of > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic but > > > > being > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th lord > > > > Mangal > > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and since > > > > takes > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by > > Parashara > > > > is > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th Lord) > > are > > > > alwyas > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th > > lord > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th lord > > > > (Mangal > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th > > lord > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th lord > > ( > > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and Guru > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > much to > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which are > > not > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > dispute > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are aware > > > > that > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and also > > > > called > > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas from > > > > various > > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > > different > > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > > available in > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also > > appears in > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The reason > > is > > > > the > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< > > lÉte > > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa na > > yogaà > > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or > > 10^th > > > > are > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give > > rise to > > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > > acquired by > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the 11th > > is > > > > made > > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat sa > > eva > > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > > mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > > > trikonesh > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba > > Sanskrit > > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we dont > > get a > > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara says > > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha and is > > > > placed > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. He > > does > > > > not > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the 9th > > or > > > > trine > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate translation > > (as > > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen rNØezae n > > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > > l¶axIzae=ip > > > > cet! > > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th is not > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if he is > > also > > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives benefic > > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > > > referring > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > > > referring > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, 8th > > > > lord if > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as Shubha. > > As > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not > > affect > > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are mixed > > as you > > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and > > another > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > > correct/enhance > > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and > > Venus > > > > for > > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and Merc > > for > > > > Aquar > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and same > > > > planet > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and placed in > > > > 9'th is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : Though > > not > > > > bad, > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we should > > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be posting > > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2008 Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th lord > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. I have already proved that with Dhanu lagna.It clearly says that 5th lord mars is Shubha but he says that Yogakaraka is 9th and 10th lord. If we accept your version(that 5th can be yogakaraka) then tell why Parashara has not considered Mars as Yogakaraka being 5th lord for Dhanu? Now dont give the answer that it is implied! In that case why he explicitly said that Budha is Yogakaraka? Even though Budha is not trikonesh to Dhanu lagna.Look at those lagnas where Surya/Chnadra become 10th lord? BPHS says that they are Yogakarakas eventhough they cannot be trikonesh. 10th House and NM,and NB When 10th is owned by Natural Malefic(Shani or Mars)it can be either 3rd, 5th,9th or 11th lord simultaneously. I say that 10th lord if not co-lord of 3,6,8,11 qualify for Yogakaraka. So naturally when it becomes 5th lord(Karka) it becomes YK. When 10th lord is owned by Natural Benefic(Guru,Shukra,Budha) it can be either kendresh, 5th or 3rd lord simultaneously. When it is 3rd lord it is not Yogakaraka otherwise it is always. When 10th lord is owned by Surya or Chandra it is always YK. >Even when confronted with a shloka from Parashara telling clearly >that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its ownership of 10th bhava >but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord Mars Shloka The shloka(regarding Mars) which you have given is not seen in BPHS( I have many versions of BPHS but none has that sholka of Mars). But same shloka is present in LaghuParashari. Are you again advocating LP over BPHS? LP Vs BPHS I really dont understand what it means when you say that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of BPHS. Do you mean to say that LP author copied shlokas from then available BPHS? LP has only 42 shlokas and there are many shlokas which are not present in BPHS. The shloka that you put forward in your support of 8th is present in LP but that is not present in BPHS. Like we see many such shlokas as the very first shloka of LP says that " after reading Parashara Hora, Udidayapradeep is being written " . The LP is basically a brief commentary on Parashara that is what LP author says. So LP is a understanding of BPHS of some unknown pandit. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > I think this is leading nowhere. Even when confronted with a shloka from > Parashara telling clearly that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its > ownership of 10th bhava but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord, > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th lord > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. You also want to give yogakaraka > status to 9th lord though Parashara clearly talks about the 5th being > more important than the 9th. You want to appear to be bent on proving > the unprovable. So be it. I am sure those who read what is being said > will form their own opinion on what is the factual position. > > By the way, if you think Laghu Parashari is not written or given by > Parashara then I am sure you must not also be thinking much of Sitaram > Jha who is credited with being amongst the first to locate a manuscript > of Parashari ( now called BPHS) and who though about there having to be > a manuscript in existence that is larger than Laghu Parashari as in his > opinion it was necessary that Laghu Parashari is only a part of what > ought to be a larger text. This is really strange for one who swears by > Parashara. Anyway, if you go through enough editions of BPHS you will > find that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of > BPHS. I could even give you the shloka and the adhyaaya with the edition > of BPHS in which the shloka appears, but do not think that is going to > serve any purpose as you have already made up your mind that what ever > does not suit your theory can not have been written or told by Parashara. > > > Chandrashekhar. > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekahr ji Namaste > > > > Now you are going for everybody. OK. But if you read my earlier mails > > I made it very clear way back that I am only trying to understand the > > Yogadhya of BPHS where Parashara has described Shubhashuba and > > Yogakaraka grahas for each lagna. I once even said that I understand > > the importance of 5th as Trikonesh and its role in Rajyogakaraka as > > given in Rajyogadya in BPHS. I did not want to comment on that. Since > > you are selective in your reading mails, you can now quote a shloka > > from Rajyogadya. > > To prove my point I paste from my previous mails > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > Parashara has given in detail graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > > > lords. But I > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > > > the discussions. > > > > So there is no point in ignoring what has already been said. I made > > it clear to keep discussions with reference to Yogadhayaya and you > > exactly ignored this. I again say that try to keep discussions to > > Yogadhya of BPHS and quote from that portions where parashara has > > enumerated Shubha(FB), Ashubha(FM) and Yogakaraka(YK). First BPHS > > talks about Shubha then Yogakaraka and then Rajyogakaraka. In my > > opinion there is clear distiction among these, taht is why it is > > given in that order. > > > > For your ready ref. I again try to narrate the course of discussions > > in this thread. > > 1)The thread started because of Shri Lalit put a topic regarding 8th > > lord and its shubhatva. > > 2)You replied with the statement that if a graha owns a good house > > along with 6th or 8th it is not considered as functional benefic. > > 3)To that I replied that 8th lord if lord of good house is considered > > as shubha by Parashara. > > > > 4)Possibly you did not like mail from me. So you ridiculed my post by > > saying " Read what Parashara says carefully, again " and quoted shloka > > from your BPHS. > > > > 5) To that I had to tell you that I wrote after reading and > > understanding BPHS. I then quote shlokas from BPHS. > > > > 6) Then you gave a twist. The shloka that you said to be from BPHS > > turned out to be from LaghuParashari! You even advocated use of LP > > over BPHS. Possibly that was the first instance where a Jyotish Guru > > was advocating LP over BPHS. Since it was from a Guru nobody took it > > by surprised. But I was indeed surprised! I even asked what will > > happen to those topics which are not in LP but are in BPHS. You > > avoided that! > > > > 7) After that I tried to explain my position(even trying till date!). > > > > 8) You got confused with use of abrivations and posibly lost the > > track from there onwards as you kept silent on LP and BPHS issue. > > > > 9)I tried to tell you that I am only refereing to the shlokas from > > 35th adhaya of BPHS where parashara has described each lagna in > > detail. > > 10) You ignored this statement/mail and continued with your topic. > > > > 11....) After that I tried and tried and tried but you possibly lost > > the interest and expressed your anger/frustration by opting out of my > > class as if you were attending my class for me and not for VEDIC > > JYOTISH. That was really sad. > > > > 12)After reading so many mails on one topic from me if you still feel > > that I do not want to take trouble to read I am sorry for that. I > > even tried to explain pointwise for your easy understanding but at > > your age you can always make any statements and you expect everybody > > to accept it(because you are at 'your age'). Offcourse, many here > > will accept you because of your status. But try to read my mails from > > start and you will find that I have not changed my position and > > categorically said that I am only trying to understand shlokas from > > Yogadhya in which Parashara has described each lagna in detail. I > > even gave the shloka for Karka Lagna where you were banking much. I > > again give it for you. Please tell me after reading that shloka where > > parashara has said about Mars being Yogakaraka because of 5th instead > > of 10th. > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > > > for a > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > > > BPHS > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > shlokas > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > Why this way?? > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > any > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. > > > > Why are you asking others to intervene? Is it not gathering support? > > > > Anyway, nothing is lost. I again say that please try to restrict > > discussions to those shlokas where parashara has described Shubha > > (FB), Ashubha(FM), and Yogakaraka(YK) on the request of Maitriya. > > > > >From those shlokas I hold follwoing things. > > 1)5th and 9th is always Shubha(FB) > > 1.1 9th is always Shubha but 5th gets some blemish in case of Kanya. > > 2) 9th and 10th lords can become Yogakaraka. Here Parashara has > > avoided 5th lords. Ex. Tul and Dhanu lagnas will say that parashara > > has treated 5th and 9th differently. I asked this to you but you > > avoided it. > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th not blemished because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11 > > can become yogakaraka. > > > > So this for all to see and read what way discussions went. I again > > request you to read this mail in good spirit and clarify. > > > > As regards to Sunday class, I am sure you wanted to create problem > > for me and thats why you opted out from my class. I do not have habit > > of twisting the thngs. I know that you dont want to listen(i.e. be in > > class again) that is why I prefer to be silent on the statement " For > > a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like situation! " . > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > P.S: Plese give the name of chapter for the second shloka. The one > > which talks about Kuja. I did not find it in BPHS. Now please dont > > say that I dont want to take trouble of finding it. > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > You have held the position that 5th lord can not be a yogakaraka > > and > > > only 9th and 10th can be yogakaraka and quote certain Lagnas about > > which > > > Parashara commented. I have said that is not the case. I have also > > said > > > that to suit meter sometimes words like yogakaraka are not > > explicitly > > > used in ancient texts. I also said that Parashara says that mars is > > not > > > yogakaraka because it is lord of the 10th for Karka lagna but as it > > is > > > simultaneously 5th lord and asked you to find out the shloka and > > offer > > > your comments. Since you do not want to take the trouble to find > > out > > > what Parashara says about the 5th and the 9th bhava and also the > > 10th > > > bhava. I will give the relevant shlokas for your as well as others > > > reference. I am sure the learned will form their own opinion as to > > what > > > the sage stated. > > > > > > 1`) > > > > > > tp>Swanaixpae mÙI mÙaxIzae ivze;t>, > > > > > > %ÉavNyaeNys<+òaE jatíeidh raJyÉakoe.39,33. > > > > > > yÇ k...Çaip s<yu´aE vaip taE smsÝmaE, > > > > > > rajv<zÉvae balae raja Évit iniítm!.39,34. > > > > > > tapaùsthänädhipo mantré manträdhéço viçeñataù| > > > > > > ubhävanyonyasandåñöau jätaçcediha räajyabhäk||39|33|| > > > > > > yatra kuträpi saàyuktau väpi tau samasaptamau| > > > > > > räjavaàçabhavo bälo räjä bhavati niçcitam||39|34|| > > > > > > /_The lord of the Tapa (9^th ) bhava is a minister and *more > > especially > > > is the lord of the Mantra (5^th ) bhava*, their mutual aspect will > > > bestow a kingdom on a Jataka. Even when these two are conjunct in > > any > > > bhava or should they be in sama saptaka (mutually in 1/7 position > > or > > > opposition), one born of a royal family will certainly become a > > king._/ > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > k...jSy kmRnet & Tvàyu´a zuÉkairta, > > > > > > kujasya karmanetåtvaprayuktä çubhakäritä | > > > > > > iÇkae[syaip net & Tve n kmeRzTvmaÇt>.12. > > > > > > trikoëasyäpi netåtve na karmeçatvamätrataù ||12|| > > > > > > /_Mangal (for Karka/Cancer nativity) becomes benefic not because he > > is > > > only lord of the 10^th (Mesha/Aries rasi) but on account of his > > > ownership of trikona bhava (Vrishchika rasi), simultaneously._/ > > > > > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > any > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. You are > > right, > > > at my age it is indeed difficult to understand some thing as gospel > > > truth in the name of a sage having said so when that sage has > > explicitly > > > said otherwise. That is the luxury of perhaps reserved for the > > modern > > > generation. > > > > > > Please do not try to twist things about Sunday classes. You have > > not yet > > > explained what you meant by " For a change you can appreciate to > > avoid > > > Sunday class like situation! " , if not to ask just to accept your > > > interpretation of what Parashara meant without referring to > > Parashara? > > > What situation were you referring to if not to frank discussions > > on > > > principles of astrology that you wanted me to avoid? > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > evidence > > > > to > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & > > avoiding > > > > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka > > & > > > > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara > > > > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I > > asked > > > > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t > > Dhanu & > > > > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > > > > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of > > interpreting > > > > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > > > > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your > > age > > > > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > > > > writting this) is it fair? > > > > > > > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I > > > > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons > > > > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand > > > > certain facts of life. > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > evidence > > > > to > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor > > understand. > > > > The > > > > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in > > almost > > > > all > > > > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > > > > > > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > > > > Parashara > > > > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that > > > > matter, > > > > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The > > proverb > > > > I > > > > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement > > > > accepting > > > > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > > > > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > > > > instance > > > > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote " " For a change you can > > > > appreciate > > > > > to avoid Sunday class like situation! " Can you explain as to how > > > > this > > > > > statement means and then how does it mean " It was just a natural > > > > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence > > I > > > > said > > > > > it. " Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > > > > astrological principles? > > > > > > > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes > > I > > > > have > > > > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of > > > > charge and > > > > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you > > wanted me > > > > to > > > > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment > > on > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > > > > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of > > your > > > > age > > > > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > > > > sentences > > > > > like " avoid class like situation is a clear indication that > > putting > > > > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not > > welcome. > > > > > > > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where > > my > > > > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am > > doing. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > > > consistent position. > > > > > > > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it > > is > > > > not > > > > > > demystifying! > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > > > for a > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > > > BPHS > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > shlokas > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > > > being > > > > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting > > with > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and > > nja > > > > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord > > but > > > > not > > > > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. > > Again, > > > > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. > > Tula > > > > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said > > and > > > > can > > > > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the > > question > > > > is > > > > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, > > one of > > > > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) > > > > what > > > > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > > > > categorically > > > > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas > > are > > > > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as > > Shubha > > > > and > > > > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th > > lord. > > > > Here > > > > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the > > > > matter > > > > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages > > need > > > > not > > > > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said > > categorically > > > > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages > > need > > > > not > > > > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where > > sages > > > > have > > > > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > > > > opinion we > > > > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them > > > > explicit > > > > > > when they are implicit. > > > > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > > > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > > > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and > > Simha > > > > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and > > > > 10th > > > > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha > > can > > > > lead > > > > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding > > 3,6,8,11th > > > > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! > > If you > > > > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting > > that > > > > > > you dont accept " Baba vakyam pramanam " . Is it justified? It > > would > > > > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by > > me > > > > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you > > > > simply > > > > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or > > simplfy it > > > > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the > > last > > > > mail > > > > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted > > for > > > > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit > > evertime > > > > but > > > > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes > > querier an > > > > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers > > get a > > > > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already > > decided > > > > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, > > you > > > > wont > > > > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss > > anything > > > > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever > > > > have > > > > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the > > clss) it > > > > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without > > fail. It > > > > is > > > > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no > > > > monetary > > > > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk > > about > > > > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and > > writting > > > > all > > > > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference > > to it > > > > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in > > that! > > > > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is > > > > serving > > > > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the > > other > > > > hand > > > > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > > > consistent > > > > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the > > 10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be > > yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > you > > > > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to > > the > > > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have > > said > > > > that > > > > > > time > > > > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake > > of > > > > > > meter > > > > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented > > upon, you > > > > > > chose > > > > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not > > being > > > > the > > > > > > reason > > > > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its > > lord of > > > > the > > > > > > 5th. > > > > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was > > your > > > > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for > > > > Simha > > > > > > (Leo) > > > > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it > > is > > > > you > > > > > > that > > > > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > > > > > becoming > > > > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the > > case of > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being > > either > > > > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to > > > > know > > > > > > as to > > > > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as > > capable of > > > > > > giving > > > > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your > > > > previous > > > > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > > > > specifically. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is > > to > > > > > > state a > > > > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not > > > > stated > > > > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > > > > > classifying, > > > > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars > > from > > > > such > > > > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not > > feel > > > > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the > > discussion > > > > from > > > > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka > > (choose > > > > > > the > > > > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention > > the > > > > word > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > > > > status, I > > > > > > asked > > > > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has > > clearly > > > > said > > > > > > that > > > > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > > > > yogakaraka ( > > > > > > Only > > > > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > being > > > > > > proposed > > > > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However > > since > > > > the > > > > > > way I > > > > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you > > > > want > > > > > > to, it > > > > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury > > by > > > > > > itself is > > > > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with > > Moon. > > > > The > > > > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a > > mail. > > > > > > Could > > > > > > > you tell me what it means by " For a change you can > > appreciate to > > > > > > avoid > > > > > > > Sunday class like situation! " What situation is to be > > avoided? I > > > > > > may be > > > > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those > > who > > > > have > > > > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the > > > > sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating > > that > > > > > > claiming > > > > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic > > > > Jyotish? > > > > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > > > > interesting > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > > > > appriciating > > > > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that > > for > > > > The > > > > > > King > > > > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable > > that > > > > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I > > mean > > > > both > > > > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > where as > > > > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th > > lord > > > > for > > > > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where > > as 5th > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction > > that > > > > we > > > > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. > > It > > > > seems > > > > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on > > Internet! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I > > already > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept > > that > > > > 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > > > > > indicated by > > > > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is > > > > this > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell > > me why > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him > > to > > > > say > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for > > Simha > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says > > that > > > > > > Mars is > > > > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. > > Going by > > > > your > > > > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as > > being > > > > > > > > capable of > > > > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > > > > differentiate > > > > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or > > > > does the > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord > > for > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you > > apply > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > > > > discussion by > > > > > > > > you, and > > > > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the > > same > > > > > > time I > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam > > > > Pramanam " . > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be > > one to > > > > > > cause > > > > > > > > hurt > > > > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going > > on > > > > since > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > days > > > > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > > > > > continue no > > > > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you > > say > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we > > should > > > > > > get 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given > > you > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is > > not > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria > > for > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th > > > > and 4th > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > > > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish > > > > but is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still > > qualifies > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives > > > > clear > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have > > qualified as > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 > > qualify as > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic > > > > with 5th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some > > lagnas > > > > 5th > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put > > > > forward > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others > > as > > > > well!) > > > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic > > > > works > > > > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > this > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > > > worry, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation > > like > > > > this > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve > > > > Vedic > > > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are > > > > avoiding > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to > > > > happen > > > > > > but I > > > > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to > > serve > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your > > position > > > > that > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord > > can > > > > not > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for > > that. > > > > That > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for > > > > Makara > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the > > reason > > > > being, > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th > > lord. > > > > You > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for > > Karka > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the > > yogakaraka > > > > for > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but > > because > > > > he > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that > > since, > > > > > > unlike > > > > > > > > me, > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must > > know > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > this > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > > > worry, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation > > like > > > > this > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > > > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. > > 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. > > For > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- > > > > lording > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka > > lagna > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > > > house) > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th > > lord of > > > > > > each > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get > > Yogakaraka? > > > > NO. > > > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special > > importance to > > > > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday > > class > > > > like > > > > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that > > only > > > > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one > > hand > > > > and > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the > > > > 10th > > > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that > > *only > > > > > > *9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that > > only > > > > 9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara > > must > > > > have > > > > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > > > > Rajyogakaraka, > > > > > > as he > > > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? > > If > > > > it > > > > > > be so, > > > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > > > > understand > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte > > loop! I > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to > > read/understand > > > > > > it. In > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once > > > > again > > > > > > paste > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK > > if > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > > > who is > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of > > co- > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara > > has not > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara > > says > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara > > says > > > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish > > being > > > > 12th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as > > Yogakarak for > > > > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord > > > > Surya and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when > > > > becomes > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th > > diffrently. > > > > Is it > > > > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is > > the > > > > 9th > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between > > 5th > > > > and > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord can > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th > > > > lord of > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As > > a > > > > > > matter of > > > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because > > it is > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying > > is > > > > that > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. > > > > Among > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier > > mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to > > being > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these > > Shubha > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not > > as > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK > > if > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > > > who is > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of > > co- > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this > > comes > > > > > > out to > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and > > > > reconsider > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not > > tell > > > > you > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with > > the > > > > > > metre of > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and > > accepting > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like > > to > > > > draw > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa > > to > > > > Mars > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that > > lagna. Now > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka > > since > > > > the > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying > > that > > > > only > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > > > > lagna,Parashara > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but > > only > > > > > > Chandra > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although > > > > Shani is > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not > > qualify > > > > it > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha (FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the > > Lagnas > > > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > Parashara has > > > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > > > lords. > > > > > > But > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we > > had > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th > > can not > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS > > > > well, > > > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can > > become > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality > > of > > > > > > english. I > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be > > RYK. > > > > That > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > > > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > > > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of > > 5th > > > > and > > > > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to > > Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always > > > > Shubha > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be > > with > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does > > not > > > > mean > > > > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a > > > > shubha > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read > > together > > > > it > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no > > mistake in > > > > my > > > > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what > > you > > > > > > mean by > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my > > age > > > > the > > > > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not > > > > say " I > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak " ? and > > > > then > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does > > mean > > > > > > that a > > > > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > But > > > > then > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from > > my > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not > > YK. > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid > > repetition > > > > BPHS > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though > > not > > > > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said > > > > anything > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing > > > > specific > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > > > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > > > > SmrutaH " . > > > > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific > > > > lagna > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and > > Guru > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > > > much to > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which > > are > > > > not > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > > > dispute > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this > > question > > > > what > > > > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to > > > > what you > > > > > > > > meant > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > > > > benefic? So > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any > > such > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, > > > > Parashara > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take > > general and > > > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > > > > specific to > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there (to be > > > > > > qualified > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > That is > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well > > > > when > > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha > > and is > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of > > > > 11th as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord > > > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being > > 8th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is > > > > only > > > > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with > > Mangal > > > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and > > co- > > > > lord > > > > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and > > co- > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic > > but > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th > > lord > > > > > > Mangal > > > > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and > > since > > > > > > takes > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by > > > > Parashara > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th > > Lord) > > > > are > > > > > > alwyas > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > > > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th > > lord > > > > > > (Mangal > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th > > lord > > > > ( > > > > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and > > Guru > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > > > much to > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which > > are > > > > not > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > > > dispute > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are > > aware > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and > > also > > > > > > called > > > > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas > > from > > > > > > various > > > > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > > > > different > > > > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > > > > available in > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also > > > > appears in > > > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The > > reason > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > > > > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< > > > > lÉte > > > > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa > > na > > > > yogaà > > > > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or > > > > 10^th > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give > > > > rise to > > > > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > > > > acquired by > > > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the > > 11th > > > > is > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat > > sa > > > > eva > > > > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > > > > > trikonesh > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba > > > > Sanskrit > > > > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we > > dont > > > > get a > > > > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara > > says > > > > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha > > and is > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. > > He > > > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the > > 9th > > > > or > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate > > translation > > > > (as > > > > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready > > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen > > rNØezae n > > > > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > > > > l¶axIzae=ip > > > > > > cet! > > > > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th > > is not > > > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if > > he is > > > > also > > > > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives > > benefic > > > > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, > > 8th > > > > > > lord if > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as > > Shubha. > > > > As > > > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > > > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not > > > > affect > > > > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for > > your > > > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > > > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are > > mixed > > > > as you > > > > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and > > > > another > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear > > Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > > > > correct/enhance > > > > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and > > same > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and > > > > Venus > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and > > same > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and > > Merc > > > > for > > > > > > Aquar > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and > > same > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > placed in > > > > > > 9'th is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : > > Though > > > > not > > > > > > bad, > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we > > should > > > > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be > > posting > > > > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2008 Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 Dear Prabodh Ji, Namaskaar, Will u be disagree that for Libra lagna, Saturn is the Yogkaraka, If it's not then what is Yogkaraka for Libra. It was a good discussion, at least my understanding is improved, Now i can remember what is Yogkarka for what Lagna. When you are going to explain the promised qualitative difference section for various Yogkarakas for the various Lagnas, Hope there will be sth substantial and we wont finish with encrusting Yogkarka planet's characteristic on the chart we will also come to know how to understand difference btwn Shubha and Yogkaraka, and finally you will finish pending analysis for the chart of Shubhas Chandra Bosh. We are eagerly waiting for ur posts. regards, Lalit. Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh Vekhande " <amolmandar wrote: > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th > lord > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. > > I have already proved that with Dhanu lagna.It clearly says that 5th > lord mars is Shubha but he says that Yogakaraka is 9th and 10th lord. > If we accept your version(that 5th can be yogakaraka) then tell why > Parashara has not considered Mars as Yogakaraka being 5th lord for > Dhanu? Now dont give the answer that it is implied! In that case why > he explicitly said that Budha is Yogakaraka? Even though Budha is not > trikonesh to Dhanu lagna.Look at those lagnas where Surya/Chnadra > become 10th lord? BPHS says that they are Yogakarakas eventhough they > cannot be trikonesh. > > 10th House and NM,and NB > > When 10th is owned by Natural Malefic(Shani or Mars)it can be either > 3rd, 5th,9th or 11th lord simultaneously. I say that 10th lord if not > co-lord of 3,6,8,11 qualify for Yogakaraka. So naturally when it > becomes 5th lord(Karka) it becomes YK. > > When 10th lord is owned by Natural Benefic(Guru,Shukra,Budha) it can > be either kendresh, 5th or 3rd lord simultaneously. When it is 3rd > lord it is not Yogakaraka otherwise it is always. > > When 10th lord is owned by Surya or Chandra it is always YK. > > >Even when confronted with a shloka from Parashara telling clearly > >that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its ownership of 10th bhava > >but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord > > Mars Shloka > > The shloka(regarding Mars) which you have given is not seen in BPHS ( > I have many versions of BPHS but none has that sholka of Mars). But > same shloka is present in LaghuParashari. Are you again advocating LP > over BPHS? > > LP Vs BPHS > > I really dont understand what it means when you say that not a single > shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of BPHS. Do you mean to > say that LP author copied shlokas from then available BPHS? LP has > only 42 shlokas and there are many shlokas which are not present in > BPHS. The shloka that you put forward in your support of 8th is > present in LP but that is not present in BPHS. Like we see many such > shlokas as the very first shloka of LP says that " after reading > Parashara Hora, Udidayapradeep is being written " . The LP is basically > a brief commentary on Parashara that is what LP author says. So LP is > a understanding of BPHS of some unknown pandit. > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > Prabodh Vekhande > Jai Jai Shankar > Har Har Shankar > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > I think this is leading nowhere. Even when confronted with a shloka > from > > Parashara telling clearly that Mars is not yogakaraka because of > its > > ownership of 10th bhava but only as it is simultaneously the 5th > lord, > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th > lord > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. You also want to give yogakaraka > > status to 9th lord though Parashara clearly talks about the 5th > being > > more important than the 9th. You want to appear to be bent on > proving > > the unprovable. So be it. I am sure those who read what is being > said > > will form their own opinion on what is the factual position. > > > > By the way, if you think Laghu Parashari is not written or given by > > Parashara then I am sure you must not also be thinking much of > Sitaram > > Jha who is credited with being amongst the first to locate a > manuscript > > of Parashari ( now called BPHS) and who though about there having > to be > > a manuscript in existence that is larger than Laghu Parashari as in > his > > opinion it was necessary that Laghu Parashari is only a part of > what > > ought to be a larger text. This is really strange for one who > swears by > > Parashara. Anyway, if you go through enough editions of BPHS you > will > > find that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that > of > > BPHS. I could even give you the shloka and the adhyaaya with the > edition > > of BPHS in which the shloka appears, but do not think that is going > to > > serve any purpose as you have already made up your mind that what > ever > > does not suit your theory can not have been written or told by > Parashara. > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2008 Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 Dear Prabodh, The arguments are becoming more and more far from reasonable. If you want to translate "Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM" as Mercury by itself being yogakaraka, then perhaps Sanskrit grammar needs to be redefined. Where does Parashara say that Budha by itself is yogakaraka? It is said to cause yoga by combining with the trine lord Sun and by the way your favourite phrase rajyogakaraka not used here. Even where Sun becomes 10th lord as in the case of Vrishchika it is not becoming yogakaraka unless conjunct Chandra who is the trine lord. Fir Tula lagna Chandra also is not independently yogakaraka as proposed by you but only in conjunction with Mercury the trine lord that it gets that status. So do not try to project that Parashara said that Sun and Moon become yogakaraka because they are 10th lord and that Parashara said so. He does not. Of course if you want to misinterpret what Parashara said to suit your arguments you are free to do so. That does not make it right. It would be interesting so see how you try to project Surya the 5th lord, for Mesha lagna, classified by Parashara to be capable of giving yoga with Guru as not being able to give yoga to suit your pet theory of only the 9th and the 10th lords being capable of acquiring yogakaraka status. it would also be interesting to see how you try to project Guru as yogakaraka and thus a what you like to call FB for Mithuna lagna by virtue of being 10th lord and the 7th lord (thus not attracting your pet exception theory), even though Parashara classifies it as a Malefic. I am sure the group members will certainly learn a new logic when you attempt to demonstrate how even though Parashara said this in BPHS, according to you he did not. Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th lord > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. I have already proved that with Dhanu lagna.It clearly says that 5th lord mars is Shubha but he says that Yogakaraka is 9th and 10th lord. If we accept your version(that 5th can be yogakaraka) then tell why Parashara has not considered Mars as Yogakaraka being 5th lord for Dhanu? Now dont give the answer that it is implied! In that case why he explicitly said that Budha is Yogakaraka? Even though Budha is not trikonesh to Dhanu lagna.Look at those lagnas where Surya/Chnadra become 10th lord? BPHS says that they are Yogakarakas eventhough they cannot be trikonesh. 10th House and NM,and NB When 10th is owned by Natural Malefic(Shani or Mars)it can be either 3rd, 5th,9th or 11th lord simultaneously. I say that 10th lord if not co-lord of 3,6,8,11 qualify for Yogakaraka. So naturally when it becomes 5th lord(Karka) it becomes YK. When 10th lord is owned by Natural Benefic(Guru,Shukra,Budha) it can be either kendresh, 5th or 3rd lord simultaneously. When it is 3rd lord it is not Yogakaraka otherwise it is always. When 10th lord is owned by Surya or Chandra it is always YK. >Even when confronted with a shloka from Parashara telling clearly >that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its ownership of 10th bhava >but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord Mars Shloka The shloka(regarding Mars) which you have given is not seen in BPHS( I have many versions of BPHS but none has that sholka of Mars). But same shloka is present in LaghuParashari. Are you again advocating LP over BPHS? LP Vs BPHS I really dont understand what it means when you say that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of BPHS. Do you mean to say that LP author copied shlokas from then available BPHS? LP has only 42 shlokas and there are many shlokas which are not present in BPHS. The shloka that you put forward in your support of 8th is present in LP but that is not present in BPHS. Like we see many such shlokas as the very first shloka of LP says that "after reading Parashara Hora, Udidayapradeep is being written". The LP is basically a brief commentary on Parashara that is what LP author says. So LP is a understanding of BPHS of some unknown pandit. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > I think this is leading nowhere. Even when confronted with a shloka from > Parashara telling clearly that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its > ownership of 10th bhava but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord, > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th lord > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. You also want to give yogakaraka > status to 9th lord though Parashara clearly talks about the 5th being > more important than the 9th. You want to appear to be bent on proving > the unprovable. So be it. I am sure those who read what is being said > will form their own opinion on what is the factual position. > > By the way, if you think Laghu Parashari is not written or given by > Parashara then I am sure you must not also be thinking much of Sitaram > Jha who is credited with being amongst the first to locate a manuscript > of Parashari ( now called BPHS) and who though about there having to be > a manuscript in existence that is larger than Laghu Parashari as in his > opinion it was necessary that Laghu Parashari is only a part of what > ought to be a larger text. This is really strange for one who swears by > Parashara. Anyway, if you go through enough editions of BPHS you will > find that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of > BPHS. I could even give you the shloka and the adhyaaya with the edition > of BPHS in which the shloka appears, but do not think that is going to > serve any purpose as you have already made up your mind that what ever > does not suit your theory can not have been written or told by Parashara. > > > Chandrashekhar. > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekahr ji Namaste > > > > Now you are going for everybody. OK. But if you read my earlier mails > > I made it very clear way back that I am only trying to understand the > > Yogadhya of BPHS where Parashara has described Shubhashuba and > > Yogakaraka grahas for each lagna. I once even said that I understand > > the importance of 5th as Trikonesh and its role in Rajyogakaraka as > > given in Rajyogadya in BPHS. I did not want to comment on that. Since > > you are selective in your reading mails, you can now quote a shloka > > from Rajyogadya. > > To prove my point I paste from my previous mails > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > Parashara has given in detail graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > > > lords. But I > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > > > the discussions. > > > > So there is no point in ignoring what has already been said. I made > > it clear to keep discussions with reference to Yogadhayaya and you > > exactly ignored this. I again say that try to keep discussions to > > Yogadhya of BPHS and quote from that portions where parashara has > > enumerated Shubha(FB), Ashubha(FM) and Yogakaraka(YK). First BPHS > > talks about Shubha then Yogakaraka and then Rajyogakaraka. In my > > opinion there is clear distiction among these, taht is why it is > > given in that order. > > > > For your ready ref. I again try to narrate the course of discussions > > in this thread. > > 1)The thread started because of Shri Lalit put a topic regarding 8th > > lord and its shubhatva. > > 2)You replied with the statement that if a graha owns a good house > > along with 6th or 8th it is not considered as functional benefic. > > 3)To that I replied that 8th lord if lord of good house is considered > > as shubha by Parashara. > > > > 4)Possibly you did not like mail from me. So you ridiculed my post by > > saying "Read what Parashara says carefully, again" and quoted shloka > > from your BPHS. > > > > 5) To that I had to tell you that I wrote after reading and > > understanding BPHS. I then quote shlokas from BPHS. > > > > 6) Then you gave a twist. The shloka that you said to be from BPHS > > turned out to be from LaghuParashari! You even advocated use of LP > > over BPHS. Possibly that was the first instance where a Jyotish Guru > > was advocating LP over BPHS. Since it was from a Guru nobody took it > > by surprised. But I was indeed surprised! I even asked what will > > happen to those topics which are not in LP but are in BPHS. You > > avoided that! > > > > 7) After that I tried to explain my position(even trying till date!). > > > > 8) You got confused with use of abrivations and posibly lost the > > track from there onwards as you kept silent on LP and BPHS issue. > > > > 9)I tried to tell you that I am only refereing to the shlokas from > > 35th adhaya of BPHS where parashara has described each lagna in > > detail. > > 10) You ignored this statement/mail and continued with your topic. > > > > 11....) After that I tried and tried and tried but you possibly lost > > the interest and expressed your anger/frustration by opting out of my > > class as if you were attending my class for me and not for VEDIC > > JYOTISH. That was really sad. > > > > 12)After reading so many mails on one topic from me if you still feel > > that I do not want to take trouble to read I am sorry for that. I > > even tried to explain pointwise for your easy understanding but at > > your age you can always make any statements and you expect everybody > > to accept it(because you are at 'your age'). Offcourse, many here > > will accept you because of your status. But try to read my mails from > > start and you will find that I have not changed my position and > > categorically said that I am only trying to understand shlokas from > > Yogadhya in which Parashara has described each lagna in detail. I > > even gave the shloka for Karka Lagna where you were banking much. I > > again give it for you. Please tell me after reading that shloka where > > parashara has said about Mars being Yogakaraka because of 5th instead > > of 10th. > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > > > for a > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > > > BPHS > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > shlokas > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > Why this way?? > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > any > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. > > > > Why are you asking others to intervene? Is it not gathering support? > > > > Anyway, nothing is lost. I again say that please try to restrict > > discussions to those shlokas where parashara has described Shubha > > (FB), Ashubha(FM), and Yogakaraka(YK) on the request of Maitriya. > > > > >From those shlokas I hold follwoing things. > > 1)5th and 9th is always Shubha(FB) > > 1.1 9th is always Shubha but 5th gets some blemish in case of Kanya. > > 2) 9th and 10th lords can become Yogakaraka. Here Parashara has > > avoided 5th lords. Ex. Tul and Dhanu lagnas will say that parashara > > has treated 5th and 9th differently. I asked this to you but you > > avoided it. > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th not blemished because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11 > > can become yogakaraka. > > > > So this for all to see and read what way discussions went. I again > > request you to read this mail in good spirit and clarify. > > > > As regards to Sunday class, I am sure you wanted to create problem > > for me and thats why you opted out from my class. I do not have habit > > of twisting the thngs. I know that you dont want to listen(i.e. be in > > class again) that is why I prefer to be silent on the statement "For > > a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like situation!". > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > P.S: Plese give the name of chapter for the second shloka. The one > > which talks about Kuja. I did not find it in BPHS. Now please dont > > say that I dont want to take trouble of finding it. > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > You have held the position that 5th lord can not be a yogakaraka > > and > > > only 9th and 10th can be yogakaraka and quote certain Lagnas about > > which > > > Parashara commented. I have said that is not the case. I have also > > said > > > that to suit meter sometimes words like yogakaraka are not > > explicitly > > > used in ancient texts. I also said that Parashara says that mars is > > not > > > yogakaraka because it is lord of the 10th for Karka lagna but as it > > is > > > simultaneously 5th lord and asked you to find out the shloka and > > offer > > > your comments. Since you do not want to take the trouble to find > > out > > > what Parashara says about the 5th and the 9th bhava and also the > > 10th > > > bhava. I will give the relevant shlokas for your as well as others > > > reference. I am sure the learned will form their own opinion as to > > what > > > the sage stated. > > > > > > 1`) > > > > > > tp>Swanaixpae mÙI mÙaxIzae ivze;t>, > > > > > > %ÉavNyaeNys<+òaE jatíeidh raJyÉakoe.39,33. > > > > > > yÇ k...Çaip s<yu´aE vaip taE smsÝmaE, > > > > > > rajv<zÉvae balae raja Évit iniítm!.39,34. > > > > > > tapaùsthänädhipo mantré manträdhéço viçeñataù| > > > > > > ubhävanyonyasandåñöau jätaçcediha räajyabhäk||39|33|| > > > > > > yatra kuträpi saàyuktau väpi tau samasaptamau| > > > > > > räjavaàçabhavo bälo räjä bhavati niçcitam||39|34|| > > > > > > /_The lord of the Tapa (9^th ) bhava is a minister and *more > > especially > > > is the lord of the Mantra (5^th ) bhava*, their mutual aspect will > > > bestow a kingdom on a Jataka. Even when these two are conjunct in > > any > > > bhava or should they be in sama saptaka (mutually in 1/7 position > > or > > > opposition), one born of a royal family will certainly become a > > king._/ > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > k...jSy kmRnet & Tvàyu´a zuÉkairta, > > > > > > kujasya karmanetåtvaprayuktä çubhakäritä | > > > > > > iÇkae[syaip net & Tve n kmeRzTvmaÇt>.12. > > > > > > trikoëasyäpi netåtve na karmeçatvamätrataù ||12|| > > > > > > /_Mangal (for Karka/Cancer nativity) becomes benefic not because he > > is > > > only lord of the 10^th (Mesha/Aries rasi) but on account of his > > > ownership of trikona bhava (Vrishchika rasi), simultaneously._/ > > > > > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > any > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. You are > > right, > > > at my age it is indeed difficult to understand some thing as gospel > > > truth in the name of a sage having said so when that sage has > > explicitly > > > said otherwise. That is the luxury of perhaps reserved for the > > modern > > > generation. > > > > > > Please do not try to twist things about Sunday classes. You have > > not yet > > > explained what you meant by "For a change you can appreciate to > > avoid > > > Sunday class like situation!", if not to ask just to accept your > > > interpretation of what Parashara meant without referring to > > Parashara? > > > What situation were you referring to if not to frank discussions > > on > > > principles of astrology that you wanted me to avoid? > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > evidence > > > > to > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & > > avoiding > > > > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for Karka > > & > > > > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that Parashara > > > > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. I > > asked > > > > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t > > Dhanu & > > > > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > > > > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of > > interpreting > > > > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > > > > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At your > > age > > > > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > > > > writting this) is it fair? > > > > > > > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class but I > > > > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the persons > > > > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to understand > > > > certain facts of life. > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > evidence > > > > to > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor > > understand. > > > > The > > > > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in > > almost > > > > all > > > > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand it. > > > > > > > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > > > > Parashara > > > > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for that > > > > matter, > > > > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The > > proverb > > > > I > > > > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some statement > > > > accepting > > > > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > > > > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > > > > instance > > > > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote For a change you can > > > > appreciate > > > > > to avoid Sunday class like situation!" Can you explain as to how > > > > this > > > > > statement means and then how does it mean "It was just a natural > > > > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and hence > > I > > > > said > > > > > it." Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > > > > astrological principles? > > > > > > > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish classes > > I > > > > have > > > > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free of > > > > charge and > > > > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you > > wanted me > > > > to > > > > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not comment > > on > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without any > > > > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people of > > your > > > > age > > > > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > > > > sentences > > > > > like "avoid class like situation is a clear indication that > > putting > > > > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not > > welcome. > > > > > > > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place where > > my > > > > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am > > doing. > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > > > consistent position. > > > > > > > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that it > > is > > > > not > > > > > > demystifying! > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was searching > > > > for a > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far as my > > > > BPHS > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > shlokas > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > > > being > > > > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting > > with > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) and > > nja > > > > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th lord > > but > > > > not > > > > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by Parashara. > > Again, > > > > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are yogakaraka. > > Tula > > > > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically said > > and > > > > can > > > > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the > > question > > > > is > > > > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my view, > > one of > > > > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform logic) > > > > what > > > > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > > > > categorically > > > > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and Yogakarakas > > are > > > > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as > > Shubha > > > > and > > > > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th > > lord. > > > > Here > > > > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to simplfy the > > > > matter > > > > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that sages > > need > > > > not > > > > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said > > categorically > > > > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that sages > > need > > > > not > > > > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where > > sages > > > > have > > > > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > > > > opinion we > > > > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make them > > > > explicit > > > > > > when they are implicit. > > > > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit about > > > > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, Dhanu, > > > > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, Mithuna,and > > Simha > > > > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that 9th and > > > > 10th > > > > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their sambhandha > > can > > > > lead > > > > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding > > 3,6,8,11th > > > > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as well! > > If you > > > > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by sugessting > > that > > > > > > you dont accept "Baba vakyam pramanam". Is it justified? It > > would > > > > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been given by > > me > > > > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear you > > > > simply > > > > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or > > simplfy it > > > > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the > > last > > > > mail > > > > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord differently for > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you opted > > for > > > > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit > > evertime > > > > but > > > > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes > > querier an > > > > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers > > get a > > > > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already > > decided > > > > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about it, > > you > > > > wont > > > > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss > > anything > > > > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never ever > > > > have > > > > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the > > clss) it > > > > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without > > fail. It > > > > is > > > > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when no > > > > monetary > > > > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to talk > > about > > > > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and > > writting > > > > all > > > > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my reference > > to it > > > > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in > > that! > > > > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who is > > > > serving > > > > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the > > other > > > > hand > > > > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to hold a > > > > > > consistent > > > > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and the > > 10th > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be > > yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > > you > > > > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by referring to > > the > > > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You have > > said > > > > that > > > > > > time > > > > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for sake > > of > > > > > > meter > > > > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented > > upon, you > > > > > > chose > > > > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not > > being > > > > the > > > > > > reason > > > > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its > > lord of > > > > the > > > > > > 5th. > > > > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as was > > your > > > > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th lord for > > > > Simha > > > > > > (Leo) > > > > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my view, it > > is > > > > you > > > > > > that > > > > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to qualify for > > > > > > becoming > > > > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the > > case of > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being > > either > > > > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I wanted to > > > > know > > > > > > as to > > > > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as > > capable of > > > > > > giving > > > > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of your > > > > previous > > > > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka for > > Dhanu > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > > > > specifically. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological texts, is > > to > > > > > > state a > > > > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It is not > > > > stated > > > > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells this by > > > > > > classifying, > > > > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding Mars > > from > > > > such > > > > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do not > > feel > > > > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the > > discussion > > > > from > > > > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka > > (choose > > > > > > the > > > > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must mention > > the > > > > word > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > > > > status, I > > > > > > asked > > > > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has > > clearly > > > > said > > > > > > that > > > > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > > > > yogakaraka ( > > > > > > Only > > > > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > being > > > > > > proposed > > > > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However > > since > > > > the > > > > > > way I > > > > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with what you > > > > want > > > > > > to, it > > > > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna Mercury > > by > > > > > > itself is > > > > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with > > Moon. > > > > The > > > > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not specifically > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of a > > mail. > > > > > > Could > > > > > > > you tell me what it means by "For a change you can > > appreciate to > > > > > > avoid > > > > > > > Sunday class like situation!" What situation is to be > > avoided? I > > > > > > may be > > > > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask those > > who > > > > have > > > > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of the > > > > sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating > > that > > > > > > claiming > > > > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify Vedic > > > > Jyotish? > > > > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > > > > interesting > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > > > > appriciating > > > > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not that > > for > > > > The > > > > > > King > > > > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not appriciable > > that > > > > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and 9th. I > > mean > > > > both > > > > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > where as > > > > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember that for > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna 9th > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become 12th > > lord > > > > for > > > > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka where > > as 5th > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural reaction > > that > > > > we > > > > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said it. > > It > > > > seems > > > > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on > > Internet! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I > > already > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to accept > > that > > > > 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as specifically > > > > > > indicated by > > > > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. But is > > > > this > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray tell > > me why > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want him > > to > > > > say > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for > > Simha > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only says > > that > > > > > > Mars is > > > > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. > > Going by > > > > your > > > > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered as > > being > > > > > > > > capable of > > > > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > > > > differentiate > > > > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to you? Or > > > > does the > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th lord > > for > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you > > apply > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > > > > discussion by > > > > > > > > you, and > > > > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At the > > same > > > > > > time I > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of "Baba Vakayam > > > > Pramanam". > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not be > > one to > > > > > > cause > > > > > > > > hurt > > > > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been going > > on > > > > since > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > days > > > > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that will > > > > > > continue no > > > > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If you > > say > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then we > > should > > > > > > get 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have given > > you > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it is > > not > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the criteria > > for > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it not 5th > > > > and 4th > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord so > > > > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without blemish > > > > but is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still > > qualifies > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has given > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna gives > > > > clear > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have > > qualified as > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies as > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 > > qualify as > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform logic > > > > with 5th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some > > lagnas > > > > 5th > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not put > > > > forward > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and others > > as > > > > well!) > > > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above logic > > > > works > > > > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > this > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > > > worry, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation > > like > > > > this > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to serve > > > > Vedic > > > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for Nagpur > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your are > > > > avoiding > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that to > > > > happen > > > > > > but I > > > > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to > > serve > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your > > position > > > > that > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th lord > > can > > > > not > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for > > that. > > > > That > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that for > > > > Makara > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the > > reason > > > > being, > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th > > lord. > > > > You > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka for > > Karka > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the > > yogakaraka > > > > for > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but > > because > > > > he > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that > > since, > > > > > > unlike > > > > > > > > me, > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you must > > know > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > this > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. Do not > > > > worry, > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a situation > > like > > > > this > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand that > > > > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to Parashara. > > 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as Yogakaraka. > > For > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is not co- > > > > lording > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For Karka > > lagna > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 > > > > house) > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th > > lord of > > > > > > each > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give it > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get > > Yogakaraka? > > > > NO. > > > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special > > importance to > > > > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid Sunday > > class > > > > like > > > > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say that > > only > > > > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the one > > hand > > > > and > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord of the > > > > 10th > > > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only if 5th > > > > lord > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement that > > *only > > > > > > *9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept that > > only > > > > 9th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then Parashara > > must > > > > have > > > > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > > > > Rajyogakaraka, > > > > > > as he > > > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your contention? > > If > > > > it > > > > > > be so, > > > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > > > > understand > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte > > loop! I > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to > > read/understand > > > > > > it. In > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I once > > > > again > > > > > > paste > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK > > if > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > > > who is > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of > > co- > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara > > has not > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. Parashara > > says > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha and > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is 12th > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What Parashara > > says > > > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish > > being > > > > 12th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as > > Yogakarak for > > > > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th lord > > > > Surya and > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th lord is > > > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord when > > > > becomes > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th > > diffrently. > > > > Is it > > > > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. Saturn is > > the > > > > 9th > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction between > > 5th > > > > and > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say "2) only 9th lord can > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga" in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. 5th > > > > lord of > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th lord. As > > a > > > > > > matter of > > > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana because > > it is > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while saying > > is > > > > that > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without blemish. > > > > Among > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the earlier > > mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific to > > being > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these > > Shubha > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified not > > as > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as RYK > > if > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the only one > > > > who is > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be because of > > co- > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how this > > comes > > > > > > out to > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail and > > > > reconsider > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need not > > tell > > > > you > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep with > > the > > > > > > metre of > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and > > accepting > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would like > > to > > > > draw > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of rajyogakarakatwa > > to > > > > Mars > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that > > lagna. Now > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be rajyogakaraka > > since > > > > the > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is saying > > that > > > > only > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light of > > > > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha that > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > > > > lagna,Parashara > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha(FB) but > > only > > > > > > Chandra > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that although > > > > Shani is > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not > > qualify > > > > it > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha (FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all the > > Lagnas > > > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha(FM) and > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th adhyaya > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > Parashara has > > > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including Trik > > > > lords. > > > > > > But > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we > > had > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th > > can not > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my BPHS > > > > well, > > > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet can > > become > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my quality > > of > > > > > > english. I > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can be > > RYK. > > > > That > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy some > > > > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or Functional > > > > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord of > > 5th > > > > and > > > > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to > > Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is always > > > > Shubha > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be > > with > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish does > > not > > > > mean > > > > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can be > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean that a > > > > shubha > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read > > together > > > > it > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no > > mistake in > > > > my > > > > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to what > > you > > > > > > mean by > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at my > > age > > > > the > > > > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you not > > > > say "I > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakarak" ? and > > > > then > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it does > > mean > > > > > > that a > > > > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if blemished. > > But > > > > then > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction from > > my > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is not > > YK. > > > > 9th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid > > repetition > > > > BPHS > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation though > > not > > > > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not said > > > > anything > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before describing > > > > specific > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of Bhava- > > > > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > > > > SmrutaH". > > > > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of specific > > > > lagna > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and > > Guru > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > > > much to > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which > > are > > > > not > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > > > dispute > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this > > question > > > > what > > > > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear as to > > > > what you > > > > > > > > meant > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > > > > benefic? So > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not being > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any > > such > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember right, > > > > Parashara > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take > > general and > > > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > > > > specific to > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified as > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). Secondly,these > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there (to be > > > > > > qualified > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > That is > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as well > > > > when > > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is Shubha > > and is > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is lord of > > > > 11th as > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th lord > > > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and 10th > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but being > > 8th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th lord > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but RYK is > > > > only > > > > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is RYK but > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with > > Mangal > > > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and > > co- > > > > lord > > > > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and > > co- > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is benefic > > but > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as 10th > > lord > > > > > > Mangal > > > > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic and > > since > > > > > > takes > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand by > > > > Parashara > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th > > Lord) > > > > are > > > > > > alwyas > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if owns > > > > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 6th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 6th > > lord > > > > > > (Mangal > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB and 8th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and 8th > > lord > > > > ( > > > > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu and > > Guru > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have nothing > > > > much to > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari which > > are > > > > not > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we can > > > > dispute > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you are > > aware > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form and > > also > > > > > > called > > > > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of shlokas > > from > > > > > > various > > > > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > > > > different > > > > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > > > > available in > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same also > > > > appears in > > > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The > > reason > > > > is > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > > > > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe[ n yaeg< > > > > lÉte > > > > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù sambandhamätreëa > > na > > > > yogaà > > > > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the 9^th or > > > > 10^th > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not give > > > > rise to > > > > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > > > > acquired by > > > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or the > > 11th > > > > is > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th is not > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat > > sa > > > > eva > > > > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > > > > mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th lord) is > > > > > > trikonesh > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in Choukhanba > > > > Sanskrit > > > > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we > > dont > > > > get a > > > > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what Parashara > > says > > > > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is lagnesha > > and is > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered ashubha. > > He > > > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of the > > 9th > > > > or > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate > > translation > > > > (as > > > > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready > > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen > > rNØezae n > > > > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > > > > l¶axIzae=ip > > > > > > cet! > > > > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva çubhasandhätä > > > > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the 8^th > > is not > > > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However if > > he is > > > > also > > > > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives > > benefic > > > > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if you are > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka you are > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per Parashara, > > 8th > > > > > > lord if > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as > > Shubha. > > > > As > > > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to 9th the > > > > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it does not > > > > affect > > > > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for > > your > > > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are yet not > > > > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are > > mixed > > > > as you > > > > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house and > > > > another > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear > > Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > > > > correct/enhance > > > > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one and > > same > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc and > > > > Venus > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one and > > same > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc and > > Merc > > > > for > > > > > > Aquar > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on and > > same > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > placed in > > > > > > 9'th is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : > > Though > > > > not > > > > > > bad, > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we > > should > > > > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be > > posting > > > > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > The arguments are becoming more and more far from reasonable. No and Yes. No since now at least you have stopped defending LP over BPHS! and Yse becuse now you have started to question Sanskrit! You have not given the details of the Mars shloka. I am sure it is the same one that is there in LP but none of BPHS has it. What is the reason(since you said I am going far from being reasonable) for giving a shloka from LP(saying that it is from Parashara!) twice in the discussions when it was clearly told to remain specifically with BPHS Yogakarak chapter? Why to quote a shloka from LP projecting it as from Parashara? Is it not taking advantage of your age and positions? Very sad. Sanskrit Grammer Now, you have doubt about Sanskrit as well. Lets get into that. >If you > want to translate " Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM " as Mercury by itself being > yogakaraka, then perhaps Sanskrit grammar needs to be redefined. It simply means Bhaskar(The Sun) and Budha. Sitaram Zha as well transleted it as Ravi and Budha. All other BPHS translators have said that Ravi and Budha are yogakaraka for Dhunu lagana. You want to say that these Sanskrit scholars were at fault? Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM doest not imply togetherness. It is simple Dwivachan. Dwivachan will always means different identity. So when it is said " Yogo Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM " in Sitaram Zha's BPHS it means Ravi and Budha are Yogakaraka and that is what Sitaram Zha as well translated. You want to complecate the matter by adding 'togetherness' to it. Since you have already fixed your mind to oppose whatever I say, you have even started ridiculing what others have translated. But that will not change the truth. > Even where Sun becomes 10th lord as in the case of Vrishchika it is not > becoming yogakaraka unless conjunct Chandra who is the trine lord. Again, for Vrishchika lagna Sitaram Zha BPHS has a shloka as " SuryaChandrasaveva BhavetaM YogakaraKaou " It means Suraya and Chandra will be Yogakaraka. here again it is Dwivachan. For you it may be anything but in the same shloka it says " Shubhau GuruNishakaraou " Here as well it is dwivachan and it means Guru and Chandra are Shubha. It does not mean Guru and Chandra when together will be Shubha. Why are you arguing on these points which do not have any base? Read any BPHS and all Pundits (including your own SITARAM ZHA) have translated the way I tried and all of us are correct. It is your understanding that parashara says that 9th and 10th together leads to Yogakarak( may be because of influence of LP) but that is not the truth. Read and translate BPHS without baised and possibly you will agree. Anybody can verify translation of the above shloka by reading Sitaram Zha's BPHS on pg no 124-127. Master Khelarilala Sankatparsad Publications, SureshChandra Mishra's BPHS 248-251(Hindi V1) and 347- 357 in English edition V1 Ranjan Publications,Devendra Zha's BPHS 199- 203 Choukhamba Publications. Be at one place. I request that you first decide what to oppose. You first gave a shloka(Ashtamesh..) from LP and even advocated LP ovwer BPHS. As if it was not enough,later again you tried to give a shloka(Mars one) from LP projecting it as Parashara's. Since you were on the wrong foot right from the start, in desparate attempt now you have questioned Sanskrit. This is not correct way and simply means you are arguing for the sake of arguments. As, once you say that 'my Sanskrit is better than your sanskrit' whole argument gets diverted and hence becomes useless and unproductive. I have already given page no and Book names to verify what other Pundits say about Sanskrit translations. But you wont accept that either. This is clear sign of frustration. Use of words like 'your favourite' & 'your pet theory' and running away from my class without provocation, and repeatedly trying to muster support from others clerly indicates that. If you feel that I am wrong say it clearly but dont try to say that under the grab that I am misinterpreting Sanskrit. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > The arguments are becoming more and more far from reasonable. If you > want to translate " Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM " as Mercury by itself being > yogakaraka, then perhaps Sanskrit grammar needs to be redefined. Where > does Parashara say that Budha by itself is yogakaraka? It is said to > cause yoga by combining with the trine lord Sun and by the way your > favourite phrase rajyogakaraka not used here. > > Even where Sun becomes 10th lord as in the case of Vrishchika it is not > becoming yogakaraka unless conjunct Chandra who is the trine lord. Fir > Tula lagna Chandra also is not independently yogakaraka as proposed by > you but only in conjunction with Mercury the trine lord that it gets > that status. So do not try to project that Parashara said that Sun and > Moon become yogakaraka because they are 10th lord and that Parashara > said so. He does not. Of course if you want to misinterpret what > Parashara said to suit your arguments you are free to do so. That does > not make it right. > > It would be interesting so see how you try to project Surya the 5th > lord, for Mesha lagna, classified by Parashara to be capable of giving > yoga with Guru as not being able to give yoga to suit your pet theory of > only the 9th and the 10th lords being capable of acquiring yogakaraka > status. it would also be interesting to see how you try to project Guru > as yogakaraka and thus a what you like to call FB for Mithuna lagna by > virtue of being 10th lord and the 7th lord (thus not attracting your pet > exception theory), even though Parashara classifies it as a Malefic. > > > I am sure the group members will certainly learn a new logic when you > attempt to demonstrate how even though Parashara said this in BPHS, > according to you he did not. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th > > lord > > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. > > > > I have already proved that with Dhanu lagna.It clearly says that 5th > > lord mars is Shubha but he says that Yogakaraka is 9th and 10th lord. > > If we accept your version(that 5th can be yogakaraka) then tell why > > Parashara has not considered Mars as Yogakaraka being 5th lord for > > Dhanu? Now dont give the answer that it is implied! In that case why > > he explicitly said that Budha is Yogakaraka? Even though Budha is not > > trikonesh to Dhanu lagna.Look at those lagnas where Surya/Chnadra > > become 10th lord? BPHS says that they are Yogakarakas eventhough they > > cannot be trikonesh. > > > > 10th House and NM,and NB > > > > When 10th is owned by Natural Malefic(Shani or Mars)it can be either > > 3rd, 5th,9th or 11th lord simultaneously. I say that 10th lord if not > > co-lord of 3,6,8,11 qualify for Yogakaraka. So naturally when it > > becomes 5th lord(Karka) it becomes YK. > > > > When 10th lord is owned by Natural Benefic(Guru,Shukra,Budha) it can > > be either kendresh, 5th or 3rd lord simultaneously. When it is 3rd > > lord it is not Yogakaraka otherwise it is always. > > > > When 10th lord is owned by Surya or Chandra it is always YK. > > > > >Even when confronted with a shloka from Parashara telling clearly > > >that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its ownership of 10th bhava > > >but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord > > > > Mars Shloka > > > > The shloka(regarding Mars) which you have given is not seen in BPHS( > > I have many versions of BPHS but none has that sholka of Mars). But > > same shloka is present in LaghuParashari. Are you again advocating LP > > over BPHS? > > > > LP Vs BPHS > > > > I really dont understand what it means when you say that not a single > > shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of BPHS. Do you mean to > > say that LP author copied shlokas from then available BPHS? LP has > > only 42 shlokas and there are many shlokas which are not present in > > BPHS. The shloka that you put forward in your support of 8th is > > present in LP but that is not present in BPHS. Like we see many such > > shlokas as the very first shloka of LP says that " after reading > > Parashara Hora, Udidayapradeep is being written " . The LP is basically > > a brief commentary on Parashara that is what LP author says. So LP is > > a understanding of BPHS of some unknown pandit. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I think this is leading nowhere. Even when confronted with a shloka > > from > > > Parashara telling clearly that Mars is not yogakaraka because of > > its > > > ownership of 10th bhava but only as it is simultaneously the 5th > > lord, > > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th > > lord > > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. You also want to give yogakaraka > > > status to 9th lord though Parashara clearly talks about the 5th > > being > > > more important than the 9th. You want to appear to be bent on > > proving > > > the unprovable. So be it. I am sure those who read what is being > > said > > > will form their own opinion on what is the factual position. > > > > > > By the way, if you think Laghu Parashari is not written or given by > > > Parashara then I am sure you must not also be thinking much of > > Sitaram > > > Jha who is credited with being amongst the first to locate a > > manuscript > > > of Parashari ( now called BPHS) and who though about there having > > to be > > > a manuscript in existence that is larger than Laghu Parashari as in > > his > > > opinion it was necessary that Laghu Parashari is only a part of > > what > > > ought to be a larger text. This is really strange for one who > > swears by > > > Parashara. Anyway, if you go through enough editions of BPHS you > > will > > > find that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that > > of > > > BPHS. I could even give you the shloka and the adhyaaya with the > > edition > > > of BPHS in which the shloka appears, but do not think that is going > > to > > > serve any purpose as you have already made up your mind that what > > ever > > > does not suit your theory can not have been written or told by > > Parashara. > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekahr ji Namaste > > > > > > > > Now you are going for everybody. OK. But if you read my earlier > > mails > > > > I made it very clear way back that I am only trying to understand > > the > > > > Yogadhya of BPHS where Parashara has described Shubhashuba and > > > > Yogakaraka grahas for each lagna. I once even said that I > > understand > > > > the importance of 5th as Trikonesh and its role in Rajyogakaraka > > as > > > > given in Rajyogadya in BPHS. I did not want to comment on that. > > Since > > > > you are selective in your reading mails, you can now quote a > > shloka > > > > from Rajyogadya. > > > > To prove my point I paste from my previous mails > > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th > > adhyaya > > > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > > > Parashara has given in detail graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including > > Trik > > > > > > lords. But I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > > > > > the discussions. > > > > > > > > So there is no point in ignoring what has already been said. I > > made > > > > it clear to keep discussions with reference to Yogadhayaya and you > > > > exactly ignored this. I again say that try to keep discussions to > > > > Yogadhya of BPHS and quote from that portions where parashara has > > > > enumerated Shubha(FB), Ashubha(FM) and Yogakaraka(YK). First BPHS > > > > talks about Shubha then Yogakaraka and then Rajyogakaraka. In my > > > > opinion there is clear distiction among these, taht is why it is > > > > given in that order. > > > > > > > > For your ready ref. I again try to narrate the course of > > discussions > > > > in this thread. > > > > 1)The thread started because of Shri Lalit put a topic regarding > > 8th > > > > lord and its shubhatva. > > > > 2)You replied with the statement that if a graha owns a good house > > > > along with 6th or 8th it is not considered as functional benefic. > > > > 3)To that I replied that 8th lord if lord of good house is > > considered > > > > as shubha by Parashara. > > > > > > > > 4)Possibly you did not like mail from me. So you ridiculed my > > post by > > > > saying " Read what Parashara says carefully, again " and quoted > > shloka > > > > from your BPHS. > > > > > > > > 5) To that I had to tell you that I wrote after reading and > > > > understanding BPHS. I then quote shlokas from BPHS. > > > > > > > > 6) Then you gave a twist. The shloka that you said to be from BPHS > > > > turned out to be from LaghuParashari! You even advocated use of LP > > > > over BPHS. Possibly that was the first instance where a Jyotish > > Guru > > > > was advocating LP over BPHS. Since it was from a Guru nobody took > > it > > > > by surprised. But I was indeed surprised! I even asked what will > > > > happen to those topics which are not in LP but are in BPHS. You > > > > avoided that! > > > > > > > > 7) After that I tried to explain my position(even trying till > > date!). > > > > > > > > 8) You got confused with use of abrivations and posibly lost the > > > > track from there onwards as you kept silent on LP and BPHS issue. > > > > > > > > 9)I tried to tell you that I am only refereing to the shlokas from > > > > 35th adhaya of BPHS where parashara has described each lagna in > > > > detail. > > > > 10) You ignored this statement/mail and continued with your topic. > > > > > > > > 11....) After that I tried and tried and tried but you possibly > > lost > > > > the interest and expressed your anger/frustration by opting out > > of my > > > > class as if you were attending my class for me and not for VEDIC > > > > JYOTISH. That was really sad. > > > > > > > > 12)After reading so many mails on one topic from me if you still > > feel > > > > that I do not want to take trouble to read I am sorry for that. I > > > > even tried to explain pointwise for your easy understanding but at > > > > your age you can always make any statements and you expect > > everybody > > > > to accept it(because you are at 'your age'). Offcourse, many here > > > > will accept you because of your status. But try to read my mails > > from > > > > start and you will find that I have not changed my position and > > > > categorically said that I am only trying to understand shlokas > > from > > > > Yogadhya in which Parashara has described each lagna in detail. I > > > > even gave the shloka for Karka Lagna where you were banking much. > > I > > > > again give it for you. Please tell me after reading that shloka > > where > > > > parashara has said about Mars being Yogakaraka because of 5th > > instead > > > > of 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was > > searching > > > > > > for a > > > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far > > as my > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > Why this way?? > > > > > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > > > any > > > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. > > > > > > > > Why are you asking others to intervene? Is it not gathering > > support? > > > > > > > > Anyway, nothing is lost. I again say that please try to restrict > > > > discussions to those shlokas where parashara has described Shubha > > > > (FB), Ashubha(FM), and Yogakaraka(YK) on the request of Maitriya. > > > > > > > > >From those shlokas I hold follwoing things. > > > > 1)5th and 9th is always Shubha(FB) > > > > 1.1 9th is always Shubha but 5th gets some blemish in case of > > Kanya. > > > > 2) 9th and 10th lords can become Yogakaraka. Here Parashara has > > > > avoided 5th lords. Ex. Tul and Dhanu lagnas will say that > > parashara > > > > has treated 5th and 9th differently. I asked this to you but you > > > > avoided it. > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th not blemished because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11 > > > > can become yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > So this for all to see and read what way discussions went. I again > > > > request you to read this mail in good spirit and clarify. > > > > > > > > As regards to Sunday class, I am sure you wanted to create problem > > > > for me and thats why you opted out from my class. I do not have > > habit > > > > of twisting the thngs. I know that you dont want to listen (i.e. > > be in > > > > class again) that is why I prefer to be silent on the > > statement " For > > > > a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like > > situation! " . > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > P.S: Plese give the name of chapter for the second shloka. The one > > > > which talks about Kuja. I did not find it in BPHS. Now please dont > > > > say that I dont want to take trouble of finding it. > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > You have held the position that 5th lord can not be a yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > only 9th and 10th can be yogakaraka and quote certain Lagnas > > about > > > > which > > > > > Parashara commented. I have said that is not the case. I have > > also > > > > said > > > > > that to suit meter sometimes words like yogakaraka are not > > > > explicitly > > > > > used in ancient texts. I also said that Parashara says that > > mars is > > > > not > > > > > yogakaraka because it is lord of the 10th for Karka lagna but > > as it > > > > is > > > > > simultaneously 5th lord and asked you to find out the shloka and > > > > offer > > > > > your comments. Since you do not want to take the trouble to find > > > > out > > > > > what Parashara says about the 5th and the 9th bhava and also the > > > > 10th > > > > > bhava. I will give the relevant shlokas for your as well as > > others > > > > > reference. I am sure the learned will form their own opinion as > > to > > > > what > > > > > the sage stated. > > > > > > > > > > 1`) > > > > > > > > > > tp>Swanaixpae mÙI mÙaxIzae ivze;t>, > > > > > > > > > > %ÉavNyaeNys<+òaE jatíeidh raJyÉakoe.39,33. > > > > > > > > > > yÇ k...Çaip s<yu´aE vaip taE smsÝmaE, > > > > > > > > > > rajv<zÉvae balae raja Évit iniítm!.39,34. > > > > > > > > > > tapaùsthänädhipo mantré manträdhéço viçeñataù| > > > > > > > > > > ubhävanyonyasandåñöau jätaçcediha räajyabhäk||39|33|| > > > > > > > > > > yatra kuträpi saàyuktau väpi tau samasaptamau| > > > > > > > > > > räjavaàçabhavo bälo räjä bhavati niçcitam||39|34|| > > > > > > > > > > /_The lord of the Tapa (9^th ) bhava is a minister and *more > > > > especially > > > > > is the lord of the Mantra (5^th ) bhava*, their mutual aspect > > will > > > > > bestow a kingdom on a Jataka. Even when these two are conjunct > > in > > > > any > > > > > bhava or should they be in sama saptaka (mutually in 1/7 > > position > > > > or > > > > > opposition), one born of a royal family will certainly become a > > > > king._/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > k...jSy kmRnet & Tvàyu´a zuÉkairta, > > > > > > > > > > kujasya karmanetåtvaprayuktä çubhakäritä | > > > > > > > > > > iÇkae[syaip net & Tve n kmeRzTvmaÇt>.12. > > > > > > > > > > trikoëasyäpi netåtve na karmeçatvamätrataù ||12|| > > > > > > > > > > /_Mangal (for Karka/Cancer nativity) becomes benefic not > > because he > > > > is > > > > > only lord of the 10^th (Mesha/Aries rasi) but on account of his > > > > > ownership of trikona bhava (Vrishchika rasi), simultaneously._/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > > > any > > > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. You > > are > > > > right, > > > > > at my age it is indeed difficult to understand some thing as > > gospel > > > > > truth in the name of a sage having said so when that sage has > > > > explicitly > > > > > said otherwise. That is the luxury of perhaps reserved for the > > > > modern > > > > > generation. > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to twist things about Sunday classes. You have > > > > not yet > > > > > explained what you meant by " For a change you can appreciate to > > > > avoid > > > > > Sunday class like situation! " , if not to ask just to accept your > > > > > interpretation of what Parashara meant without referring to > > > > Parashara? > > > > > What situation were you referring to if not to frank discussions > > > > on > > > > > principles of astrology that you wanted me to avoid? > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > > > evidence > > > > > > to > > > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > > > > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & > > > > avoiding > > > > > > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for > > Karka > > > > & > > > > > > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that > > Parashara > > > > > > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. > > I > > > > asked > > > > > > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t > > > > Dhanu & > > > > > > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > > > > > > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of > > > > interpreting > > > > > > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > > > > > > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At > > your > > > > age > > > > > > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > > > > > > writting this) is it fair? > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class > > but I > > > > > > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the > > persons > > > > > > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to > > understand > > > > > > certain facts of life. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > > > evidence > > > > > > to > > > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor > > > > understand. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in > > > > almost > > > > > > all > > > > > > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for > > that > > > > > > matter, > > > > > > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The > > > > proverb > > > > > > I > > > > > > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some > > statement > > > > > > accepting > > > > > > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > > > > > > instance > > > > > > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote " " For a change you can > > > > > > appreciate > > > > > > > to avoid Sunday class like situation! " Can you explain as > > to how > > > > > > this > > > > > > > statement means and then how does it mean " It was just a > > natural > > > > > > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and > > hence > > > > I > > > > > > said > > > > > > > it. " Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > > > > > > astrological principles? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish > > classes > > > > I > > > > > > have > > > > > > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free > > of > > > > > > charge and > > > > > > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you > > > > wanted me > > > > > > to > > > > > > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not > > comment > > > > on > > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without > > any > > > > > > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people > > of > > > > your > > > > > > age > > > > > > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > > > > > > sentences > > > > > > > like " avoid class like situation is a clear indication that > > > > putting > > > > > > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not > > > > welcome. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place > > where > > > > my > > > > > > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am > > > > doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to > > hold a > > > > > > > > consistent position. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that > > it > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > demystifying! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was > > searching > > > > > > for a > > > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far > > as my > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka > > status was > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting > > > > with > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > > > > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) > > and > > > > nja > > > > > > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th > > lord > > > > but > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by > > Parashara. > > > > Again, > > > > > > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are > > yogakaraka. > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically > > said > > > > and > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the > > > > question > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my > > view, > > > > one of > > > > > > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform > > logic) > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > > > > > > categorically > > > > > > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and > > Yogakarakas > > > > are > > > > > > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as > > > > Shubha > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th > > > > lord. > > > > > > Here > > > > > > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to > > simplfy the > > > > > > matter > > > > > > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that > > sages > > > > need > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said > > > > categorically > > > > > > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that > > sages > > > > need > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where > > > > sages > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > > > > > > opinion we > > > > > > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make > > them > > > > > > explicit > > > > > > > > when they are implicit. > > > > > > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit > > about > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, > > Dhanu, > > > > > > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > > > > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, > > Mithuna,and > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that > > 9th and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their > > sambhandha > > > > can > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding > > > > 3,6,8,11th > > > > > > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as > > well! > > > > If you > > > > > > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by > > sugessting > > > > that > > > > > > > > you dont accept " Baba vakyam pramanam " . Is it justified? > > It > > > > would > > > > > > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been > > given by > > > > me > > > > > > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear > > you > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > > > > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or > > > > simplfy it > > > > > > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the > > > > last > > > > > > mail > > > > > > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord > > differently for > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you > > opted > > > > for > > > > > > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit > > > > evertime > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes > > > > querier an > > > > > > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers > > > > get a > > > > > > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already > > > > decided > > > > > > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about > > it, > > > > you > > > > > > wont > > > > > > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss > > > > anything > > > > > > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never > > ever > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the > > > > clss) it > > > > > > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without > > > > fail. It > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when > > no > > > > > > monetary > > > > > > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to > > talk > > > > about > > > > > > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and > > > > writting > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my > > reference > > > > to it > > > > > > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in > > > > that! > > > > > > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who > > is > > > > > > serving > > > > > > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the > > > > other > > > > > > hand > > > > > > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to > > hold a > > > > > > > > consistent > > > > > > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and > > the > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by > > referring to > > > > the > > > > > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You > > have > > > > said > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for > > sake > > > > of > > > > > > > > meter > > > > > > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented > > > > upon, you > > > > > > > > chose > > > > > > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not > > > > being > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > reason > > > > > > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its > > > > lord of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 5th. > > > > > > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as > > was > > > > your > > > > > > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th > > lord for > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > (Leo) > > > > > > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my > > view, it > > > > is > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to > > qualify for > > > > > > > > becoming > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the > > > > case of > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being > > > > either > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I > > wanted to > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > as to > > > > > > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as > > > > capable of > > > > > > > > giving > > > > > > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of > > your > > > > > > previous > > > > > > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka > > for > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > > > > > > specifically. > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological > > texts, is > > > > to > > > > > > > > state a > > > > > > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It > > is not > > > > > > stated > > > > > > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells > > this by > > > > > > > > classifying, > > > > > > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding > > Mars > > > > from > > > > > > such > > > > > > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do > > not > > > > feel > > > > > > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the > > > > discussion > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka > > > > (choose > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must > > mention > > > > the > > > > > > word > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > > > > > > status, I > > > > > > > > asked > > > > > > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has > > > > clearly > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > > > > > > yogakaraka ( > > > > > > > > Only > > > > > > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > > > being > > > > > > > > proposed > > > > > > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However > > > > since > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > way I > > > > > > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with > > what you > > > > > > want > > > > > > > > to, it > > > > > > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna > > Mercury > > > > by > > > > > > > > itself is > > > > > > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with > > > > Moon. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not > > specifically > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of > > a > > > > mail. > > > > > > > > Could > > > > > > > > > you tell me what it means by " For a change you can > > > > appreciate to > > > > > > > > avoid > > > > > > > > > Sunday class like situation! " What situation is to be > > > > avoided? I > > > > > > > > may be > > > > > > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask > > those > > > > who > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of > > the > > > > > > sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating > > > > that > > > > > > > > claiming > > > > > > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify > > Vedic > > > > > > Jyotish? > > > > > > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > > > > > > interesting > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > > > > > > appriciating > > > > > > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not > > that > > > > for > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > King > > > > > > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not > > appriciable > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and > > 9th. I > > > > mean > > > > > > both > > > > > > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > where as > > > > > > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember > > that for > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna > > 9th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become > > 12th > > > > lord > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka > > where > > > > as 5th > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural > > reaction > > > > that > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said > > it. > > > > It > > > > > > seems > > > > > > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on > > > > Internet! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I > > > > already > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to > > accept > > > > that > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as > > specifically > > > > > > > > indicated by > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. > > But is > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray > > tell > > > > me why > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want > > him > > > > to > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for > > > > Simha > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only > > says > > > > that > > > > > > > > Mars is > > > > > > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. > > > > Going by > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered > > as > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > capable of > > > > > > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > > > > > > differentiate > > > > > > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to > > you? Or > > > > > > does the > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th > > lord > > > > for > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you > > > > apply > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > > > > > > discussion by > > > > > > > > > > you, and > > > > > > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At > > the > > > > same > > > > > > > > time I > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of " Baba Vakayam > > > > > > Pramanam " . > > > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not > > be > > > > one to > > > > > > > > cause > > > > > > > > > > hurt > > > > > > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been > > going > > > > on > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > days > > > > > > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that > > will > > > > > > > > continue no > > > > > > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If > > you > > > > say > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then > > we > > > > should > > > > > > > > get 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have > > given > > > > you > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it > > is > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the > > criteria > > > > for > > > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it > > not 5th > > > > > > and 4th > > > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord > > so > > > > > > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without > > blemish > > > > > > but is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still > > > > qualifies > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has > > given > > > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna > > gives > > > > > > clear > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or > > 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies > > as > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same > > > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 > > > > qualify as > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform > > logic > > > > > > with 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some > > > > lagnas > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not > > put > > > > > > forward > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and > > others > > > > as > > > > > > well!) > > > > > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above > > logic > > > > > > works > > > > > > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > > > this > > > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. > > Do not > > > > > > worry, > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a > > situation > > > > like > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to > > serve > > > > > > Vedic > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for > > Nagpur > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your > > are > > > > > > avoiding > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that > > to > > > > > > happen > > > > > > > > but I > > > > > > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to > > > > serve > > > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your > > > > position > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th > > lord > > > > can > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for > > > > that. > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that > > for > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the > > > > reason > > > > > > being, > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th > > > > lord. > > > > > > You > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka > > for > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but > > > > because > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that > > > > since, > > > > > > > > unlike > > > > > > > > > > me, > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you > > must > > > > know > > > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > > > this > > > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. > > Do not > > > > > > worry, > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a > > situation > > > > like > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand > > that > > > > > > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to > > Parashara. > > > > 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as > > Yogakaraka. > > > > For > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is > > not co- > > > > > > lording > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For > > Karka > > > > lagna > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > house) > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > each > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give > > it > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get > > > > Yogakaraka? > > > > > > NO. > > > > > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special > > > > importance to > > > > > > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid > > Sunday > > > > class > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say > > that > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the > > one > > > > hand > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord > > of the > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only > > if 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement > > that > > > > *only > > > > > > > > *9th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept > > that > > > > only > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then > > Parashara > > > > must > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, > > > > > > > > as he > > > > > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your > > contention? > > > > If > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > be so, > > > > > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > > > > > > understand > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte > > > > loop! I > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to > > > > read/understand > > > > > > > > it. In > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I > > once > > > > > > again > > > > > > > > paste > > > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as > > RYK > > > > if > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the > > only one > > > > > > who is > > > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be > > because of > > > > co- > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara > > > > has not > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is > > 12th > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish > > > > being > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as > > > > Yogakarak for > > > > > > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th > > lord > > > > > > Surya and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th > > lord is > > > > > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord > > when > > > > > > becomes > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th > > > > diffrently. > > > > > > Is it > > > > > > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. > > Saturn is > > > > the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction > > between > > > > 5th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say " 2) only 9th lord > > can > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga " in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. > > 5th > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th > > lord. As > > > > a > > > > > > > > matter of > > > > > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana > > because > > > > it is > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while > > saying > > > > is > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without > > blemish. > > > > > > Among > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the > > earlier > > > > mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific > > to > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified > > not > > > > as > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as > > RYK > > > > if > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the > > only one > > > > > > who is > > > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be > > because of > > > > co- > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how > > this > > > > comes > > > > > > > > out to > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail > > and > > > > > > reconsider > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need > > not > > > > tell > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep > > with > > > > the > > > > > > > > metre of > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and > > > > accepting > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would > > like > > > > to > > > > > > draw > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of > > rajyogakarakatwa > > > > to > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that > > > > lagna. Now > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be > > rajyogakaraka > > > > since > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is > > saying > > > > that > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light > > of > > > > > > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha > > that > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > > > > > > lagna,Parashara > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha (FB) but > > > > only > > > > > > > > Chandra > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou > > ChadratatSutaou|| " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that > > although > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not > > > > qualify > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha > > (FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all > > the > > > > Lagnas > > > > > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha (FM) > > and > > > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th > > adhyaya > > > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > > > Parashara has > > > > > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including > > Trik > > > > > > lords. > > > > > > > > But > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which > > we > > > > had > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th > > > > can not > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my > > BPHS > > > > > > well, > > > > > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet > > can > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my > > quality > > > > of > > > > > > > > english. I > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can > > be > > > > RYK. > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy > > some > > > > > > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or > > Functional > > > > > > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord > > of > > > > 5th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to > > > > Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is > > always > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be > > > > with > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish > > does > > > > not > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can > > be > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can > > be > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean > > that a > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if > > blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read > > > > together > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no > > > > mistake in > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to > > what > > > > you > > > > > > > > mean by > > > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at > > my > > > > age > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you > > not > > > > > > say " I > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as > > Rajyogakarak " ? and > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it > > does > > > > mean > > > > > > > > that a > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if > > blemished. > > > > But > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not > > being > > > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction > > from > > > > my > > > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is > > not > > > > YK. > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid > > > > repetition > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation > > though > > > > not > > > > > > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not > > said > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before > > describing > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of > > Bhava- > > > > > > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that " TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > > > > > > SmrutaH " . > > > > > > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of > > specific > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu > > and > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have > > nothing > > > > > > much to > > > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari > > which > > > > are > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we > > can > > > > > > dispute > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this > > > > question > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru > > Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear > > as to > > > > > > what you > > > > > > > > > > meant > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > > > > > > benefic? So > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not > > being > > > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any > > > > such > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember > > right, > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take > > > > general and > > > > > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > > > > > > specific to > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified > > as > > > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). > > Secondly,these > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there > > (to be > > > > > > > > qualified > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as > > well. > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as > > well > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is > > Shubha > > > > and is > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is > > lord of > > > > > > 11th as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th > > lord > > > > > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but > > being > > > > 8th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th > > lord > > > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but > > RYK is > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is > > RYK but > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with > > > > Mangal > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic > > and > > > > co- > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic > > and > > > > co- > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is > > benefic > > > > but > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Mangal > > > > > > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic > > and > > > > since > > > > > > > > takes > > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand > > by > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th > > > > Lord) > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > alwyas > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if > > owns > > > > > > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB > > and 6th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and > > 6th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (Mangal > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB > > and 8th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and > > 8th > > > > lord > > > > > > ( > > > > > > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu > > and > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have > > nothing > > > > > > much to > > > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari > > which > > > > are > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we > > can > > > > > > dispute > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you > > are > > > > aware > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form > > and > > > > also > > > > > > > > called > > > > > > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of > > shlokas > > > > from > > > > > > > > various > > > > > > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > > > > > > available in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same > > also > > > > > > appears in > > > > > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The > > > > reason > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > > > > > > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > > > > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe [ n > > yaeg< > > > > > > lÉte > > > > > > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù > > sambandhamätreëa > > > > na > > > > > > yogaà > > > > > > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the > > 9^th or > > > > > > 10^th > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not > > give > > > > > > rise to > > > > > > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > > > > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > > > > > > acquired by > > > > > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or > > the > > > > 11th > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > > > > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th > > is not > > > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " lagnatrikonapavashat > > > > sa > > > > > > eva > > > > > > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mataH " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th > > lord) is > > > > > > > > trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in > > Choukhanba > > > > > > Sanskrit > > > > > > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we > > > > dont > > > > > > get a > > > > > > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for > > your > > > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is > > lagnesha > > > > and is > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > ashubha. > > > > He > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of > > the > > > > 9th > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate > > > > translation > > > > > > (as > > > > > > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready > > > > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen > > > > rNØezae n > > > > > > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > > > > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > > > > > > l¶axIzae=ip > > > > > > > > cet! > > > > > > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva > > çubhasandhätä > > > > > > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the > > 8^th > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However > > if > > > > he is > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives > > > > benefic > > > > > > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if > > you are > > > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka > > you are > > > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per > > Parashara, > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > lord if > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > As > > > > > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to > > 9th the > > > > > > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it > > does not > > > > > > affect > > > > > > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot > > for > > > > your > > > > > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh > > Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai > > Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har > > Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are > > yet not > > > > > > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are > > > > mixed > > > > > > as you > > > > > > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house > > and > > > > > > another > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear > > > > Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > > > > > > correct/enhance > > > > > > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one > > and > > > > same > > > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc > > and > > > > > > Venus > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one > > and > > > > same > > > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc > > and > > > > Merc > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > Aquar > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on > > and > > > > same > > > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > placed in > > > > > > > > 9'th is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : > > > > Though > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > bad, > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we > > > > should > > > > > > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be > > > > posting > > > > > > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 Dear Lalit ji Namaste It is not question whether I agree or disagree. I am trying to undertand what Parashara has agreed. Parashara says that for Tula lagna Chasndra and Budha are Yogakaraka. So it is like that. I will try to get into another discussion regarding Kendra(1,4,7,10) and Konas(1,5,9) yogas later once I reach some logical end in the ongoing discussions. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " litsol " <litsol wrote: > > Dear Prabodh Ji, > > Namaskaar, Will u be disagree that for Libra lagna, Saturn is the > Yogkaraka, If it's not then what is Yogkaraka for Libra. > > It was a good discussion, at least my understanding is improved, Now > i can remember what is Yogkarka for what Lagna. > > When you are going to explain the promised qualitative difference > section for various Yogkarakas for the various Lagnas, Hope there > will be sth substantial and we wont finish with encrusting Yogkarka > planet's characteristic on the chart we will also come to know how to > understand difference btwn Shubha and Yogkaraka, and finally you will > finish pending analysis for the chart of Shubhas Chandra Bosh. > > We are eagerly waiting for ur posts. > > regards, > Lalit. > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , " Prabodh Vekhande " > <amolmandar@> wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only > 10th > > lord > > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. > > > > I have already proved that with Dhanu lagna.It clearly says that > 5th > > lord mars is Shubha but he says that Yogakaraka is 9th and 10th > lord. > > If we accept your version(that 5th can be yogakaraka) then tell why > > Parashara has not considered Mars as Yogakaraka being 5th lord for > > Dhanu? Now dont give the answer that it is implied! In that case > why > > he explicitly said that Budha is Yogakaraka? Even though Budha is > not > > trikonesh to Dhanu lagna.Look at those lagnas where Surya/Chnadra > > become 10th lord? BPHS says that they are Yogakarakas eventhough > they > > cannot be trikonesh. > > > > 10th House and NM,and NB > > > > When 10th is owned by Natural Malefic(Shani or Mars)it can be > either > > 3rd, 5th,9th or 11th lord simultaneously. I say that 10th lord if > not > > co-lord of 3,6,8,11 qualify for Yogakaraka. So naturally when it > > becomes 5th lord(Karka) it becomes YK. > > > > When 10th lord is owned by Natural Benefic(Guru,Shukra,Budha) it > can > > be either kendresh, 5th or 3rd lord simultaneously. When it is 3rd > > lord it is not Yogakaraka otherwise it is always. > > > > When 10th lord is owned by Surya or Chandra it is always YK. > > > > >Even when confronted with a shloka from Parashara telling clearly > > >that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its ownership of 10th bhava > > >but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord > > > > Mars Shloka > > > > The shloka(regarding Mars) which you have given is not seen in BPHS > ( > > I have many versions of BPHS but none has that sholka of Mars). But > > same shloka is present in LaghuParashari. Are you again advocating > LP > > over BPHS? > > > > LP Vs BPHS > > > > I really dont understand what it means when you say that not a > single > > shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of BPHS. Do you mean to > > say that LP author copied shlokas from then available BPHS? LP has > > only 42 shlokas and there are many shlokas which are not present in > > BPHS. The shloka that you put forward in your support of 8th is > > present in LP but that is not present in BPHS. Like we see many > such > > shlokas as the very first shloka of LP says that " after reading > > Parashara Hora, Udidayapradeep is being written " . The LP is > basically > > a brief commentary on Parashara that is what LP author says. So LP > is > > a understanding of BPHS of some unknown pandit. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I think this is leading nowhere. Even when confronted with a > shloka > > from > > > Parashara telling clearly that Mars is not yogakaraka because of > > its > > > ownership of 10th bhava but only as it is simultaneously the 5th > > lord, > > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only > 10th > > lord > > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. You also want to give > yogakaraka > > > status to 9th lord though Parashara clearly talks about the 5th > > being > > > more important than the 9th. You want to appear to be bent on > > proving > > > the unprovable. So be it. I am sure those who read what is being > > said > > > will form their own opinion on what is the factual position. > > > > > > By the way, if you think Laghu Parashari is not written or given > by > > > Parashara then I am sure you must not also be thinking much of > > Sitaram > > > Jha who is credited with being amongst the first to locate a > > manuscript > > > of Parashari ( now called BPHS) and who though about there having > > to be > > > a manuscript in existence that is larger than Laghu Parashari as > in > > his > > > opinion it was necessary that Laghu Parashari is only a part of > > what > > > ought to be a larger text. This is really strange for one who > > swears by > > > Parashara. Anyway, if you go through enough editions of BPHS you > > will > > > find that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that > > of > > > BPHS. I could even give you the shloka and the adhyaaya with the > > edition > > > of BPHS in which the shloka appears, but do not think that is > going > > to > > > serve any purpose as you have already made up your mind that what > > ever > > > does not suit your theory can not have been written or told by > > Parashara. > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 Dear Prabodh, If saying that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side of BPHS and that BPHS revival has its origin in existence of Laghu Parashari is giving up defending Laghu Parashari against BPHS ( though why there should be a defense of one against the other is not clear), then my understanding of the English language must be deficient. I have not given the shloka deliberately as you had charged me with not reading and not understanding. Why not try to find where it is? I am sure the way you are waxing eloquent about BPHS you have all the 8 editions of BPHS with you. It might be a good idea to look into those editions and find out if a malefic as 10th lord (as in the case of mars for Karka lagna) can become a yogakaraka by itself unless it is also a trine lord. I did not know that I had to take instructions from anybody as to what chapter of the BPHS I should restrict myself to when discussing some principle that has been elaborated upon in BPHS. I also do not know that if that were true why the reluctance on your part about giving your views on other lagna examples that were sited. As to interpretation of what Sitaram Jha has said for Dhanu lagna. If as you claim, he says that Sun and Budha are independently yogakarakas, would you explain why he singles out Mars and Sun as being Shubha for that Lagna? Wrong interpretation of translation does not make it right. For your information and that of those who are reading this. what Sitaram Jha says about Vrishchika lagna is that Venus, Mercury, Saturn are Papaprada, Jupiter, Moon are shubha, Sun and Moon are yogakaraka and Mars is sama. The distinction about when he talks about grahas in their individual capacity and when he is talking about conjunction of grahas giving a certain status is very clear. If you choose to ignore that and put a new twist to it, you are free to do so. The comment "including your own SITARAM ZHA" is in extremely poor taste. Sitaram Jha has done much greater service to Jyotish than any of the present day living astrologer, in bringing to light many ancient Sanskrit texts, for him to to become someone's own. Just because he does not translates the shlokas to fit in your theory is no reason to be disrespectful to such an eminent astrologer. If you fail to understand that Laghu Parashari, by its very name indicates that it holds a small number of shlokas of Parashara and that there is actually no manuscript called BPHS, in physical existence, but those variously titled as Parashara Hora, Parashari etc. that have been given that title by some (not all) commentators to indicate that it encompasses more subjects than Laghu Parashari and both claim Parashara as the source of text in them, I can not help it. I hope you do not propose that whereas Brihatjataka is written by Varahamihira Laghujataka is not written by him, using the same sort of logic. I do not indulge in opposing for opposition's sake. Neither do I restrict myself to only one chapter of any astrological text to understand what is being said in that entire text. I think if you read the adhyaaya that you are advising me to restrict myself to for reasons bes known to you, you will certainly find many shlokas that oppose precisely what you are trying to pass on as being said by Parashara. These shlokas appear at the beginning of the adhyaaya. I only hope that you do not mean that one should read the shlokas that you put forward and accept what is being said therein without referring to what is being said in even that adhayaaya. By the way, I am not trying to muster support from anybody. I said that the readers will draw their own conclusion, or words to that effect, as this is a discussion group on astrology and not a class where students are expected to listen to whatever is being told by the teacher without the liberty of expressing their own opinion on the topic. Chandrashekhar. Prabodh Vekhande wrote: Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > The arguments are becoming more and more far from reasonable. No and Yes. No since now at least you have stopped defending LP over BPHS! and Yse becuse now you have started to question Sanskrit! You have not given the details of the Mars shloka. I am sure it is the same one that is there in LP but none of BPHS has it. What is the reason(since you said I am going far from being reasonable) for giving a shloka from LP(saying that it is from Parashara!) twice in the discussions when it was clearly told to remain specifically with BPHS Yogakarak chapter? Why to quote a shloka from LP projecting it as from Parashara? Is it not taking advantage of your age and positions? Very sad. Sanskrit Grammer Now, you have doubt about Sanskrit as well. Lets get into that. >If you > want to translate "Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM" as Mercury by itself being > yogakaraka, then perhaps Sanskrit grammar needs to be redefined. It simply means Bhaskar(The Sun) and Budha. Sitaram Zha as well transleted it as Ravi and Budha. All other BPHS translators have said that Ravi and Budha are yogakaraka for Dhunu lagana. You want to say that these Sanskrit scholars were at fault? Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM doest not imply togetherness. It is simple Dwivachan. Dwivachan will always means different identity. So when it is said "Yogo Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM" in Sitaram Zha's BPHS it means Ravi and Budha are Yogakaraka and that is what Sitaram Zha as well translated. You want to complecate the matter by adding 'togetherness' to it. Since you have already fixed your mind to oppose whatever I say, you have even started ridiculing what others have translated. But that will not change the truth. > Even where Sun becomes 10th lord as in the case of Vrishchika it is not > becoming yogakaraka unless conjunct Chandra who is the trine lord. Again, for Vrishchika lagna Sitaram Zha BPHS has a shloka as "SuryaChandrasaveva BhavetaM YogakaraKaou" It means Suraya and Chandra will be Yogakaraka. here again it is Dwivachan. For you it may be anything but in the same shloka it says "Shubhau GuruNishakaraou" Here as well it is dwivachan and it means Guru and Chandra are Shubha. It does not mean Guru and Chandra when together will be Shubha. Why are you arguing on these points which do not have any base? Read any BPHS and all Pundits (including your own SITARAM ZHA) have translated the way I tried and all of us are correct. It is your understanding that parashara says that 9th and 10th together leads to Yogakarak( may be because of influence of LP) but that is not the truth. Read and translate BPHS without baised and possibly you will agree. Anybody can verify translation of the above shloka by reading Sitaram Zha's BPHS on pg no 124-127. Master Khelarilala Sankatparsad Publications, SureshChandra Mishra's BPHS 248-251(Hindi V1) and 347- 357 in English edition V1 Ranjan Publications,Devendra Zha's BPHS 199- 203 Choukhamba Publications. Be at one place. I request that you first decide what to oppose. You first gave a shloka(Ashtamesh..) from LP and even advocated LP ovwer BPHS. As if it was not enough,later again you tried to give a shloka(Mars one) from LP projecting it as Parashara's. Since you were on the wrong foot right from the start, in desparate attempt now you have questioned Sanskrit. This is not correct way and simply means you are arguing for the sake of arguments. As, once you say that 'my Sanskrit is better than your sanskrit' whole argument gets diverted and hence becomes useless and unproductive. I have already given page no and Book names to verify what other Pundits say about Sanskrit translations. But you wont accept that either. This is clear sign of frustration. Use of words like 'your favourite' & 'your pet theory' and running away from my class without provocation, and repeatedly trying to muster support from others clerly indicates that. If you feel that I am wrong say it clearly but dont try to say that under the grab that I am misinterpreting Sanskrit. Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. Prabodh Vekhande Jai Jai Shankar Har Har Shankar Vedic Astrologyandhealing , Chandrashekhar <sharma.chandrashekhar wrote: > > Dear Prabodh, > > The arguments are becoming more and more far from reasonable. If you > want to translate "Bhaskar saumyaabhyaaM" as Mercury by itself being > yogakaraka, then perhaps Sanskrit grammar needs to be redefined. Where > does Parashara say that Budha by itself is yogakaraka? It is said to > cause yoga by combining with the trine lord Sun and by the way your > favourite phrase rajyogakaraka not used here. > > Even where Sun becomes 10th lord as in the case of Vrishchika it is not > becoming yogakaraka unless conjunct Chandra who is the trine lord. Fir > Tula lagna Chandra also is not independently yogakaraka as proposed by > you but only in conjunction with Mercury the trine lord that it gets > that status. So do not try to project that Parashara said that Sun and > Moon become yogakaraka because they are 10th lord and that Parashara > said so. He does not. Of course if you want to misinterpret what > Parashara said to suit your arguments you are free to do so. That does > not make it right. > > It would be interesting so see how you try to project Surya the 5th > lord, for Mesha lagna, classified by Parashara to be capable of giving > yoga with Guru as not being able to give yoga to suit your pet theory of > only the 9th and the 10th lords being capable of acquiring yogakaraka > status. it would also be interesting to see how you try to project Guru > as yogakaraka and thus a what you like to call FB for Mithuna lagna by > virtue of being 10th lord and the 7th lord (thus not attracting your pet > exception theory), even though Parashara classifies it as a Malefic. > > > I am sure the group members will certainly learn a new logic when you > attempt to demonstrate how even though Parashara said this in BPHS, > according to you he did not. > > Chandrashekhar. > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th > > lord > > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. > > > > I have already proved that with Dhanu lagna.It clearly says that 5th > > lord mars is Shubha but he says that Yogakaraka is 9th and 10th lord. > > If we accept your version(that 5th can be yogakaraka) then tell why > > Parashara has not considered Mars as Yogakaraka being 5th lord for > > Dhanu? Now dont give the answer that it is implied! In that case why > > he explicitly said that Budha is Yogakaraka? Even though Budha is not > > trikonesh to Dhanu lagna.Look at those lagnas where Surya/Chnadra > > become 10th lord? BPHS says that they are Yogakarakas eventhough they > > cannot be trikonesh. > > > > 10th House and NM,and NB > > > > When 10th is owned by Natural Malefic(Shani or Mars)it can be either > > 3rd, 5th,9th or 11th lord simultaneously. I say that 10th lord if not > > co-lord of 3,6,8,11 qualify for Yogakaraka. So naturally when it > > becomes 5th lord(Karka) it becomes YK. > > > > When 10th lord is owned by Natural Benefic(Guru,Shukra,Budha) it can > > be either kendresh, 5th or 3rd lord simultaneously. When it is 3rd > > lord it is not Yogakaraka otherwise it is always. > > > > When 10th lord is owned by Surya or Chandra it is always YK. > > > > >Even when confronted with a shloka from Parashara telling clearly > > >that Mars is not yogakaraka because of its ownership of 10th bhava > > >but only as it is simultaneously the 5th lord > > > > Mars Shloka > > > > The shloka(regarding Mars) which you have given is not seen in BPHS( > > I have many versions of BPHS but none has that sholka of Mars). But > > same shloka is present in LaghuParashari. Are you again advocating LP > > over BPHS? > > > > LP Vs BPHS > > > > I really dont understand what it means when you say that not a single > > shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that of BPHS. Do you mean to > > say that LP author copied shlokas from then available BPHS? LP has > > only 42 shlokas and there are many shlokas which are not present in > > BPHS. The shloka that you put forward in your support of 8th is > > present in LP but that is not present in BPHS. Like we see many such > > shlokas as the very first shloka of LP says that "after reading > > Parashara Hora, Udidayapradeep is being written". The LP is basically > > a brief commentary on Parashara that is what LP author says. So LP is > > a understanding of BPHS of some unknown pandit. > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > Jai Jai Shankar > > Har Har Shankar > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, Chandrashekhar > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > I think this is leading nowhere. Even when confronted with a shloka > > from > > > Parashara telling clearly that Mars is not yogakaraka because of > > its > > > ownership of 10th bhava but only as it is simultaneously the 5th > > lord, > > > you want to continue to argue that according to Parashara only 10th > > lord > > > can be yogakaraka and not the 5th. You also want to give yogakaraka > > > status to 9th lord though Parashara clearly talks about the 5th > > being > > > more important than the 9th. You want to appear to be bent on > > proving > > > the unprovable. So be it. I am sure those who read what is being > > said > > > will form their own opinion on what is the factual position. > > > > > > By the way, if you think Laghu Parashari is not written or given by > > > Parashara then I am sure you must not also be thinking much of > > Sitaram > > > Jha who is credited with being amongst the first to locate a > > manuscript > > > of Parashari ( now called BPHS) and who though about there having > > to be > > > a manuscript in existence that is larger than Laghu Parashari as in > > his > > > opinion it was necessary that Laghu Parashari is only a part of > > what > > > ought to be a larger text. This is really strange for one who > > swears by > > > Parashara. Anyway, if you go through enough editions of BPHS you > > will > > > find that not a single shloka of Laghu Parashari is out side that > > of > > > BPHS. I could even give you the shloka and the adhyaaya with the > > edition > > > of BPHS in which the shloka appears, but do not think that is going > > to > > > serve any purpose as you have already made up your mind that what > > ever > > > does not suit your theory can not have been written or told by > > Parashara. > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > Chandrashekahr ji Namaste > > > > > > > > Now you are going for everybody. OK. But if you read my earlier > > mails > > > > I made it very clear way back that I am only trying to understand > > the > > > > Yogadhya of BPHS where Parashara has described Shubhashuba and > > > > Yogakaraka grahas for each lagna. I once even said that I > > understand > > > > the importance of 5th as Trikonesh and its role in Rajyogakaraka > > as > > > > given in Rajyogadya in BPHS. I did not want to comment on that. > > Since > > > > you are selective in your reading mails, you can now quote a > > shloka > > > > from Rajyogadya. > > > > To prove my point I paste from my previous mails > > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th > > adhyaya > > > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > > > Parashara has given in detail graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including > > Trik > > > > > > lords. But I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which we had > > > > > > the discussions. > > > > > > > > So there is no point in ignoring what has already been said. I > > made > > > > it clear to keep discussions with reference to Yogadhayaya and you > > > > exactly ignored this. I again say that try to keep discussions to > > > > Yogadhya of BPHS and quote from that portions where parashara has > > > > enumerated Shubha(FB), Ashubha(FM) and Yogakaraka(YK). First BPHS > > > > talks about Shubha then Yogakaraka and then Rajyogakaraka. In my > > > > opinion there is clear distiction among these, taht is why it is > > > > given in that order. > > > > > > > > For your ready ref. I again try to narrate the course of > > discussions > > > > in this thread. > > > > 1)The thread started because of Shri Lalit put a topic regarding > > 8th > > > > lord and its shubhatva. > > > > 2)You replied with the statement that if a graha owns a good house > > > > along with 6th or 8th it is not considered as functional benefic. > > > > 3)To that I replied that 8th lord if lord of good house is > > considered > > > > as shubha by Parashara. > > > > > > > > 4)Possibly you did not like mail from me. So you ridiculed my > > post by > > > > saying "Read what Parashara says carefully, again" and quoted > > shloka > > > > from your BPHS. > > > > > > > > 5) To that I had to tell you that I wrote after reading and > > > > understanding BPHS. I then quote shlokas from BPHS. > > > > > > > > 6) Then you gave a twist. The shloka that you said to be from BPHS > > > > turned out to be from LaghuParashari! You even advocated use of LP > > > > over BPHS. Possibly that was the first instance where a Jyotish > > Guru > > > > was advocating LP over BPHS. Since it was from a Guru nobody took > > it > > > > by surprised. But I was indeed surprised! I even asked what will > > > > happen to those topics which are not in LP but are in BPHS. You > > > > avoided that! > > > > > > > > 7) After that I tried to explain my position(even trying till > > date!). > > > > > > > > 8) You got confused with use of abrivations and posibly lost the > > > > track from there onwards as you kept silent on LP and BPHS issue. > > > > > > > > 9)I tried to tell you that I am only refereing to the shlokas from > > > > 35th adhaya of BPHS where parashara has described each lagna in > > > > detail. > > > > 10) You ignored this statement/mail and continued with your topic. > > > > > > > > 11....) After that I tried and tried and tried but you possibly > > lost > > > > the interest and expressed your anger/frustration by opting out > > of my > > > > class as if you were attending my class for me and not for VEDIC > > > > JYOTISH. That was really sad. > > > > > > > > 12)After reading so many mails on one topic from me if you still > > feel > > > > that I do not want to take trouble to read I am sorry for that. I > > > > even tried to explain pointwise for your easy understanding but at > > > > your age you can always make any statements and you expect > > everybody > > > > to accept it(because you are at 'your age'). Offcourse, many here > > > > will accept you because of your status. But try to read my mails > > from > > > > start and you will find that I have not changed my position and > > > > categorically said that I am only trying to understand shlokas > > from > > > > Yogadhya in which Parashara has described each lagna in detail. I > > > > even gave the shloka for Karka Lagna where you were banking much. > > I > > > > again give it for you. Please tell me after reading that shloka > > where > > > > parashara has said about Mars being Yogakaraka because of 5th > > instead > > > > of 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was > > searching > > > > > > for a > > > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far > > as my > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > Why this way?? > > > > > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > > > any > > > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. > > > > > > > > Why are you asking others to intervene? Is it not gathering > > support? > > > > > > > > Anyway, nothing is lost. I again say that please try to restrict > > > > discussions to those shlokas where parashara has described Shubha > > > > (FB), Ashubha(FM), and Yogakaraka(YK) on the request of Maitriya. > > > > > > > > >From those shlokas I hold follwoing things. > > > > 1)5th and 9th is always Shubha(FB) > > > > 1.1 9th is always Shubha but 5th gets some blemish in case of > > Kanya. > > > > 2) 9th and 10th lords can become Yogakaraka. Here Parashara has > > > > avoided 5th lords. Ex. Tul and Dhanu lagnas will say that > > parashara > > > > has treated 5th and 9th differently. I asked this to you but you > > > > avoided it. > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th not blemished because of co-lordship of 3,6,8,11 > > > > can become yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > So this for all to see and read what way discussions went. I again > > > > request you to read this mail in good spirit and clarify. > > > > > > > > As regards to Sunday class, I am sure you wanted to create problem > > > > for me and thats why you opted out from my class. I do not have > > habit > > > > of twisting the thngs. I know that you dont want to listen (i.e. > > be in > > > > class again) that is why I prefer to be silent on the > > statement "For > > > > a change you can appreciate to avoid Sunday class like > > situation!". > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > P.S: Plese give the name of chapter for the second shloka. The one > > > > which talks about Kuja. I did not find it in BPHS. Now please dont > > > > say that I dont want to take trouble of finding it. > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > Chandrashekhar > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > You have held the position that 5th lord can not be a yogakaraka > > > > and > > > > > only 9th and 10th can be yogakaraka and quote certain Lagnas > > about > > > > which > > > > > Parashara commented. I have said that is not the case. I have > > also > > > > said > > > > > that to suit meter sometimes words like yogakaraka are not > > > > explicitly > > > > > used in ancient texts. I also said that Parashara says that > > mars is > > > > not > > > > > yogakaraka because it is lord of the 10th for Karka lagna but > > as it > > > > is > > > > > simultaneously 5th lord and asked you to find out the shloka and > > > > offer > > > > > your comments. Since you do not want to take the trouble to find > > > > out > > > > > what Parashara says about the 5th and the 9th bhava and also the > > > > 10th > > > > > bhava. I will give the relevant shlokas for your as well as > > others > > > > > reference. I am sure the learned will form their own opinion as > > to > > > > what > > > > > the sage stated. > > > > > > > > > > 1`) > > > > > > > > > > tp>Swanaixpae mÙI mÙaxIzae ivze;t>, > > > > > > > > > > %ÉavNyaeNys<+òaE jatíeidh raJyÉakoe.39,33. > > > > > > > > > > yÇ k...Çaip s<yu´aE vaip taE smsÝmaE, > > > > > > > > > > rajv<zÉvae balae raja Évit iniítm!.39,34. > > > > > > > > > > tapaùsthänädhipo mantré manträdhéço viçeñataù| > > > > > > > > > > ubhävanyonyasandåñöau jätaçcediha räajyabhäk||39|33|| > > > > > > > > > > yatra kuträpi saàyuktau väpi tau samasaptamau| > > > > > > > > > > räjavaàçabhavo bälo räjä bhavati niçcitam||39|34|| > > > > > > > > > > /_The lord of the Tapa (9^th ) bhava is a minister and *more > > > > especially > > > > > is the lord of the Mantra (5^th ) bhava*, their mutual aspect > > will > > > > > bestow a kingdom on a Jataka. Even when these two are conjunct > > in > > > > any > > > > > bhava or should they be in sama saptaka (mutually in 1/7 > > position > > > > or > > > > > opposition), one born of a royal family will certainly become a > > > > king._/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > k...jSy kmRnet & Tvàyu´a zuÉkairta, > > > > > > > > > > kujasya karmanetåtvaprayuktä çubhakäritä | > > > > > > > > > > iÇkae[syaip net & Tve n kmeRzTvmaÇt>.12. > > > > > > > > > > trikoëasyäpi netåtve na karmeçatvamätrataù ||12|| > > > > > > > > > > /_Mangal (for Karka/Cancer nativity) becomes benefic not > > because he > > > > is > > > > > only lord of the 10^th (Mesha/Aries rasi) but on account of his > > > > > ownership of trikona bhava (Vrishchika rasi), simultaneously._/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that the discerning will understand who is not holding > > > > any > > > > > position and not trying to understand in the discussions. You > > are > > > > right, > > > > > at my age it is indeed difficult to understand some thing as > > gospel > > > > > truth in the name of a sage having said so when that sage has > > > > explicitly > > > > > said otherwise. That is the luxury of perhaps reserved for the > > > > modern > > > > > generation. > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to twist things about Sunday classes. You have > > > > not yet > > > > > explained what you meant by "For a change you can appreciate to > > > > avoid > > > > > Sunday class like situation!", if not to ask just to accept your > > > > > interpretation of what Parashara meant without referring to > > > > Parashara? > > > > > What situation were you referring to if not to frank discussions > > > > on > > > > > principles of astrology that you wanted me to avoid? > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > > > evidence > > > > > > to > > > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > > > > > Holding no position and never try to understand implicit & > > > > avoiding > > > > > > explicit is surly demystifying? I have given the shloka for > > Karka > > > > & > > > > > > you dont want to understand, I have given the proof that > > Parashara > > > > > > has treated 10th alone as Yogakaraka you dont want to accept. > > I > > > > asked > > > > > > why Parashara has treated 5th and 9th lords differently w.r.t > > > > Dhanu & > > > > > > Tul lagna you simply try to overlook and dismiss the point by > > > > > > suggesting that my ways of interpreting and your ways of > > > > interpreting > > > > > > are different. Is this demystifying? Above all accusing me of > > > > > > holding wrong position? This is purly mystifying to me. At > > your > > > > age > > > > > > (you have habit reminding everybody your age that is why I am > > > > > > writting this) is it fair? > > > > > > > > > > > > No, I never expected you to say these things about my class > > but I > > > > > > certainly expect respect for the activity if not for the > > persons > > > > > > involved. Anyways at your age it is really difficult to > > understand > > > > > > certain facts of life. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your support. > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Holding a consistently wrong position in face of mounting > > > > evidence > > > > > > to > > > > > > > the contrary is not the way to demystify astrology. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It was you who said that I do neither want to read nor > > > > understand. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > shloka regarding Karka lagna and Mars is very much there in > > > > almost > > > > > > all > > > > > > > editions of BPHS and it is up to you to read and understand > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Assumptions of what Parashara has done does not replace what > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > said about merely being 10th lord, or any Kendra lord for > > that > > > > > > matter, > > > > > > > not being sufficient for a graha to become yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As to Babagiri, this is not a term I am familiar with. The > > > > proverb > > > > > > I > > > > > > > quoted means assuming that since some has made some > > statement > > > > > > accepting > > > > > > > it without support of text and tarka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About Sunday classes please read what you wrote in the first > > > > > > instance > > > > > > > before trying to cry foul. You wrote For a change you can > > > > > > appreciate > > > > > > > to avoid Sunday class like situation!" Can you explain as > > to how > > > > > > this > > > > > > > statement means and then how does it mean "It was just a > > natural > > > > > > > reaction that we discuss these things in Sunday class and > > hence > > > > I > > > > > > said > > > > > > > it." Does the first sentence look like invitation to discuss > > > > > > > astrological principles? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want me to tell people that you run free jyotish > > classes > > > > I > > > > > > have > > > > > > > no hesitance in saying that and also that you do that free > > of > > > > > > charge and > > > > > > > that I appreciate this activity. I was not aware that you > > > > wanted me > > > > > > to > > > > > > > tell this to all and that is the only reason I did not > > comment > > > > on > > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As to whether I decided not to attend the classes without > > any > > > > > > > provocation, there is a huge difference between what people > > of > > > > your > > > > > > age > > > > > > > may view as provocation and what people of my age do. For us > > > > > > sentences > > > > > > > like "avoid class like situation is a clear indication that > > > > putting > > > > > > > forward views that may not coincide with the writer are not > > > > welcome. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have always been taught to remove myself from any place > > where > > > > my > > > > > > > presence causes discomfort to others. So that is what I am > > > > doing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First you say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to > > hold a > > > > > > > > consistent position. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then you describe how consistent I am! But still say that > > it > > > > is > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > demystifying! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not ignore any shloka. On the other hand I was > > searching > > > > > > for a > > > > > > > > shloka for karka lagna where it is said that Mars is > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > because it is 5th lord and not because 10th lord. As far > > as my > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > is concerned, it says like this for karka lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bhargavendusutaou papaou chandraraguravH shubhaH| > > > > > > > > Bhurisoukhyakaro bhoumaH purnayogavidhayakaH||26|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hanta shanistatha suryaH phaladaH sangetarvashat | > > > > > > > > phalametannigaditam karkalagne tu janminaH||27|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It will be good if you let me know which portion of these > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > > substantiate your verion about Karka lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >(Only 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka > > status was > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > proposed by you) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is what parashara has done! That is why I was insisting > > > > with > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It says for Dhanu lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eka eva kaviH papaH shubhou kujadivakarou| > > > > > > > > Bhaskarnjaou yogakarou nihanta tanayo raveH||36|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BhaskarouNou yogakarou clearly says that Bhaskar(The Sun) > > and > > > > nja > > > > > > > > (Budha) are yogakarkaka. Budha for Dhanu lagna is 10th > > lord > > > > but > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > any trine(9th/5th) lord. So, 10th lord of its own can be > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > without being trikonesh(9th/5th) is indicated by > > Parashara. > > > > Again, > > > > > > > > when Surya and Chandra become 10th lords they are > > yogakaraka. > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > and Vrichika lagna shlokas confirm it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What should be ignored? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can not ignore what sages have categorically > > said > > > > and > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > try to understand when they chose to be silent. Now the > > > > question > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > how to understand when they chose to be silent? In my > > view, > > > > one of > > > > > > > > the ways will be understanding(I mean getting a uniform > > logic) > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > they have categorically said. So when you say that Mars is > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > for Dhanu lagna I am at confusion. Since, Parashara has > > > > > > categorically > > > > > > > > said for Dhanu lagna Mars & Surya are Shubha and > > Yogakarakas > > > > are > > > > > > > > Surya & Budha. Surya being 9th lord, he has qualified as > > > > Shubha > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka but he did not say same status for Mars the 5th > > > > lord. > > > > > > Here > > > > > > > > you ignored what is been said clearly but tried to > > simplfy the > > > > > > matter > > > > > > > > by considering 5th lord as yogakaraka sugessting that > > sages > > > > need > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > say everything forgeting that they have already said > > > > categorically > > > > > > > > what is Yogakaraka for Dhanu lagna. I understand that > > sages > > > > need > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > say all the things but this logic should be applied where > > > > sages > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > remained silent and not where they are clear enough. In my > > > > > > opinion we > > > > > > > > can not ignore when sages are explicit and try to make > > them > > > > > > explicit > > > > > > > > when they are implicit. > > > > > > > > Keeping this in mind, I find that Parashara is explicit > > about > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka with Vrishabha, Karka, Kanya, Tul, Vrichika, > > Dhanu, > > > > > > > > Makara, Kumbha, and Meena lagnas. Parashara chose to be > > > > > > > > silent/implicit regarding Yogakaraka for Mesha, > > Mithuna,and > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > lagnas. From the explicit group I got the pattern that > > 9th and > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > are primaraly considered as yogakaraka and their > > sambhandha > > > > can > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > to Rajyogakaraka/Yogakaraka when they are not holding > > > > 3,6,8,11th > > > > > > > > house. I may be wrong but who knows may be correct as > > well! > > > > If you > > > > > > > > apply this, my position about Simha will be clear to you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Babagiri?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doing this excercise you called it as Babagiri by > > sugessting > > > > that > > > > > > > > you dont accept "Baba vakyam pramanam". Is it justified? > > It > > > > would > > > > > > > > have been good had you been critical of what is been > > given by > > > > me > > > > > > > > after giving some serious thought to it. But it was clear > > you > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > wanted to ridicule it. > > > > > > > > When some question is asked you can always ignore it,or > > > > simplfy it > > > > > > > > by interpreting sages according to your suitablity. In the > > > > last > > > > > > mail > > > > > > > > I asked why parashara treated 5th and 9th lord > > differently for > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > and Tul lagnas when both are co-lord of 12th? Here you > > opted > > > > for > > > > > > > > simplification by sugessting sages need not be explicit > > > > evertime > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > ignoring the explicit itself. This simplification makes > > > > querier an > > > > > > > > object of ridicule and you to enjoy your status as readers > > > > get a > > > > > > > > simple solutons to all difficult answers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Tone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never get into bad tone and I know as you have already > > > > decided > > > > > > > > about my tone of mail and asked others to explain about > > it, > > > > you > > > > > > wont > > > > > > > > accept my version. It seems that you dont want to discuss > > > > anything > > > > > > > > aboout Sunday class. But you should remember that I never > > ever > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > talked about(except when there are some functions by the > > > > clss) it > > > > > > > > although I am running the class for last 3 years without > > > > fail. It > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > easy to criticise but difficult to perform. That to when > > no > > > > > > monetary > > > > > > > > gain is expected from it. I know that you dont want to > > talk > > > > about > > > > > > > > class on Internet (where you enjoy very high status and > > > > writting > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > these things will further blemish my image) but my > > reference > > > > to it > > > > > > > > was very natural. You read more than what was explicit in > > > > that! > > > > > > > > Otherwise what is wrong in expecting from a Jyotisha, who > > is > > > > > > serving > > > > > > > > since so many years, some words of serious Jyotish? On the > > > > other > > > > > > hand > > > > > > > > you opted to avoid the class without any provocation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40>, > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No it is not. In order to find something one has to > > hold a > > > > > > > > consistent > > > > > > > > > position. Your position has been that only th e9th and > > the > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka , and that the 5th lord can not be > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > gave Parashara as support for this argument by > > referring to > > > > the > > > > > > > > shlokas > > > > > > > > > related to different lagnas that appear in BPHS. You > > have > > > > said > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > and again, though it was pointed out why sometimes for > > sake > > > > of > > > > > > > > meter > > > > > > > > > different words are used, by the sages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When the specific shloka for Karka lagna was commented > > > > upon, you > > > > > > > > chose > > > > > > > > > to ignore what Parashara said about being 10th lord not > > > > being > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > reason > > > > > > > > > for Mars to become yogakaraka, but the reason being its > > > > lord of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 5th. > > > > > > > > > Its being rajyogakaraka is quite clearly mentioned, as > > was > > > > your > > > > > > > > > insistence. I had to ask you about your view on 9th > > lord for > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > (Leo) > > > > > > > > > lagna simply because though it is yogakaraka in my > > view, it > > > > is > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > want this to be specifically said by the sage to > > qualify for > > > > > > > > becoming > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka or rajyogakaraka as you call it. Since in the > > > > case of > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > lagna, Mars being the 9th lord is not mentioned as being > > > > either > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka, as required by you, I > > wanted to > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > as to > > > > > > > > > whether the 9th lord should now not be considered as > > > > capable of > > > > > > > > giving > > > > > > > > > yoga? Why not answer this simple question in light of > > your > > > > > > previous > > > > > > > > > averments? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never said that Mars can not become yogakaraka > > for > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > as I do not hold that the sage must every time say so > > > > > > specifically. > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > practice, as understood by me in the astrological > > texts, is > > > > to > > > > > > > > state a > > > > > > > > > principle and then allow the shishya to absorb it. It > > is not > > > > > > stated > > > > > > > > > again and again ad nauseum. Actually the sage tells > > this by > > > > > > > > classifying, > > > > > > > > > which are the malefics for Dhanu lagna and excluding > > Mars > > > > from > > > > > > such > > > > > > > > > malefics. However since this is something that you do > > not > > > > feel > > > > > > > > > comfortable with and as that would have veered the > > > > discussion > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > whether only 9th lord can be rajyogakaraka or yogakaraka > > > > (choose > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > term you want) and the position that the sage must > > mention > > > > the > > > > > > word > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka or Yogakaraka for a bhava lord to get that > > > > > > status, I > > > > > > > > asked > > > > > > > > > you your opinion about Karka lagna where the sage has > > > > clearly > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > the 10th lord ship is not the reason Mars becomes the > > > > > > yogakaraka ( > > > > > > > > Only > > > > > > > > > 10th lord being capable of giving yogakaraka status was > > > > being > > > > > > > > proposed > > > > > > > > > by you), but its being the 5th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would have been happy in sharing my knowledge. However > > > > since > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > way I > > > > > > > > > interpret the astrological text is at variance with > > what you > > > > > > want > > > > > > > > to, it > > > > > > > > > would serve no purpose. By the way, for Tula lagna > > Mercury > > > > by > > > > > > > > itself is > > > > > > > > > not called Rajyogakaraka but combination of Mercury with > > > > Moon. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > reason is apparent, but since the sage has not > > specifically > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > that, in the shloka, I do not think you will accept it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please give me the benefit of understanding the tone of > > a > > > > mail. > > > > > > > > Could > > > > > > > > > you tell me what it means by "For a change you can > > > > appreciate to > > > > > > > > avoid > > > > > > > > > Sunday class like situation!" What situation is to be > > > > avoided? I > > > > > > > > may be > > > > > > > > > poor at comprehending English so I would like to ask > > those > > > > who > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > mastered the language to tell me what is the thrust of > > the > > > > > > sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please do not try to trivialize the issue by insinuating > > > > that > > > > > > > > claiming > > > > > > > > > not to understand the meaning of the well known proverb. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekharji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >But is this not carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > May be! But is it not the correct way to demystify > > Vedic > > > > > > Jyotish? > > > > > > > > > > Dont you think this way we can find something? It is > > > > > > interesting > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > that you are keen to ask about Simha(The King) but not > > > > > > > > appriciating > > > > > > > > > > that applies to Dhanu, and other lagnas. It is not > > that > > > > for > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > King > > > > > > > > > > there is different set of rules but is it not > > appriciable > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > somebody is trying to understand universal logic for > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > Shubha graha as indicated by BPHS? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sir please share your knowledge regarding 5th and > > 9th. I > > > > mean > > > > > > both > > > > > > > > > > are Trikonesh but for Dhanu lagna 5th lord is not > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > where as > > > > > > > > > > for Tul lagna 9th lord Budha is. We must remember > > that for > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > lagna 5th lord is 12th lord as well and for Tul lagna > > 9th > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > 12th lord as well. So both are Trikonesh and become > > 12th > > > > lord > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > these two lagnas. But 9th qualifies as Yogakaraka > > where > > > > as 5th > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > not. Why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did not drag any topic. It was just a natural > > reaction > > > > that > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > discuss these things in Sunday class and hence I said > > it. > > > > It > > > > > > seems > > > > > > > > > > you dont want any discussions about Sunday class on > > > > Internet! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean I am becoming BABA now a days! Or Have I > > > > already > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > one? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40>, > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you find it difficult to > > accept > > > > that > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > be yogakaraka for owning the 5th bhava as > > specifically > > > > > > > > indicated by > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara as you have taken a different position. > > But is > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > carrying it too far? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any if you want the argument to go on, then pray > > tell > > > > me why > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > does not say that Mars is a yogakaraka (as you want > > him > > > > to > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > specifically, as indicated in your other mails) for > > > > Simha > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > he owns the 9th and the 4th bhava? Parashara only > > says > > > > that > > > > > > > > Mars is > > > > > > > > > > > shubha phalaprada and does not say Yogakaraka etc. > > > > Going by > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > arguments, 9th lord can therefore not be considered > > as > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > capable of > > > > > > > > > > > being a yogakaraka or Rajyogakaraka; as you seem to > > > > > > > > differentiate > > > > > > > > > > > between the two. Is that position acceptable to > > you? Or > > > > > > does the > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > lord Mars become blemished by owning the 4th bhava? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would be interested in knowing your take on 9th > > lord > > > > for > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > Lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > Try to apply logic uniformly here in the manner you > > > > apply > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The subject of Sunday class was dragged into this > > > > > > discussion by > > > > > > > > > > you, and > > > > > > > > > > > not me. I have served Vedic Jyotish all my life. At > > the > > > > same > > > > > > > > time I > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > also taught not to go by the dictum of "Baba Vakayam > > > > > > Pramanam". > > > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > > > > discussions hurt you as was hinted at, I would not > > be > > > > one to > > > > > > > > cause > > > > > > > > > > hurt > > > > > > > > > > > to anybody. My service to vedic Jyotish has been > > going > > > > on > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > days > > > > > > > > > > > when there were no classes of jyotish run, so that > > will > > > > > > > > continue no > > > > > > > > > > > matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think logic should be uniformly applicable. If > > you > > > > say > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara has considered 5th for yogakaraka then > > we > > > > should > > > > > > > > get 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord yogakaraka for other lagna as well. I have > > given > > > > you > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > case as well. Here, 5th lord is 12th lord but it > > is > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > Take Tula, if kendra-trikonadhipati is the > > criteria > > > > for > > > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > then Shani should qualify as yogakaraka. Is it > > not 5th > > > > > > and 4th > > > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > Another thing is that 9th lord Budha is 12th lord > > so > > > > > > > > qualifies as > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. 5th lord if 12th lord i.e. without > > blemish > > > > > > but is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka whereas 9th lord if 12th lord still > > > > qualifies > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka. This gives idea that Parashara has > > given > > > > > > greater > > > > > > > > > > > > importance to 9th against 5th. Tula/Dhanu lagna > > gives > > > > > > clear > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara teaches. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again try to understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)It is not kendra-Trikonadhipatitwa that leads to > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > > > Had it been the case Shani to Tula would have > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) YogaKaraka will always be seen from 9th or > > 10th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) If 9th or 10th is without blemish it qualifies > > as > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish happens being lord of 3,6,8,11 at the same > > > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) 9th/10th lord when co-lord 1,2,4,5,7,9,10,12 > > > > qualify as > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakaraka. 5th is just one of these. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This logic is applicable uniformly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand if we try to get some uniform > > logic > > > > > > with 5th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > we dont get any. How can we justify that for some > > > > lagnas > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka but with other it is not. I have not > > put > > > > > > forward > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > theory to justify Karka lagna and if you( and > > others > > > > as > > > > > > well!) > > > > > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > > > > > it with open heart you will find that the above > > logic > > > > > > works > > > > > > > > > > uniformly > > > > > > > > > > > > for all Lagnas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > > > this > > > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. > > Do not > > > > > > worry, > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a > > situation > > > > like > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Very sad. I thought you were in Sunday class to > > serve > > > > > > Vedic > > > > > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > and will be doing forever. It is not good for > > Nagpur > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > circle. > > > > > > > > > > > > You can avoid class but the reason for which your > > are > > > > > > avoiding > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not reflect your personality. I never wanted that > > to > > > > > > happen > > > > > > > > but I > > > > > > > > > > > > honor your decision and by any chnace you want to > > > > serve > > > > > > > > Jyotish > > > > > > > > > > > > through Sunday class I will be more than happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I shall tell you why I do not understand your > > > > position > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord can > > > > > > > > > > > > > not be a Yogakaraka. Your position is that 5th > > lord > > > > can > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > yoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > karaka. You quote Parashara as the authority for > > > > that. > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > case, could you explain why Parashara says that > > for > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > > is a yoga karaka? Please do not tell about the > > > > reason > > > > > > being, > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > > becomes yogakaraka as it is an unblemished 10th > > > > lord. > > > > > > You > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > advanced > > > > > > > > > > > > > that argument to justify Mars being yogakaraka > > for > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara himself tells that Mars is not the > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > because he is lord of a square (10th lord), but > > > > because > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine (5th bhava) simultaneously. I am sure that > > > > since, > > > > > > > > unlike > > > > > > > > > > me, > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > both read and understand what is written you > > must > > > > know > > > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > makes this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can understand that you do not wish to discuss > > > > this > > > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > > the reference to Sunday class like situation. > > Do not > > > > > > worry, > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > shall > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoid the Sunday class itself so that a > > situation > > > > like > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > arise at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the problem? Why cant you understand > > that > > > > > > > > 9th/10th if > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish can be yogakaraka according to > > Parashara. > > > > 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish is not considered as > > Yogakaraka. > > > > For > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Venus is without blemish(as it is > > not co- > > > > > > lording > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house) that is why it is yogakarkaka. For > > Karka > > > > lagna > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without blemish(as it is not co-lording > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > house) > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it becomes Yogakaraka. So simply find 9th/10th > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > each > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if it is not co-lording 3,6,8,11 house, give > > it > > > > > > Yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we apply this logic on 4th/5th to get > > > > Yogakaraka? > > > > > > NO. > > > > > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is clear, Parashara has given special > > > > importance to > > > > > > > > > > 9th/10th to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > find Yogakaraka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a change you can appriciate to avoid > > Sunday > > > > class > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > > > > > situation! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is the other way round. You say > > that > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > 9th/10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakaraka according to Parashara, on the > > one > > > > hand > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > breath say that 5th Lord if not also lord > > of the > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as yogakaraka. This to me means that only > > if 5th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhava, it is yogakaraka. So the statement > > that > > > > *only > > > > > > > > *9th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are yogakaraka is incorrect. If we accept > > that > > > > only > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lords > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can be yogakaraka as proposed, then > > Parashara > > > > must > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > erred in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > saying > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that for Kumbha lagna Venus is the only > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, > > > > > > > > as he > > > > > > > > > > > > owns > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4th and the 9th bhava. Is that your > > contention? > > > > If > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > be so, > > > > > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > indeed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I may be taken to be not wanting to read or > > > > > > understand > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems,you have decided to be in infinte > > > > loop! I > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what I wanted to. You dont want to > > > > read/understand > > > > > > > > it. In > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > last > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mail only I tried to write gist of it. I > > once > > > > > > again > > > > > > > > paste > > > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as > > RYK > > > > if > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the > > only one > > > > > > who is > > > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be > > because of > > > > co- > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th lord if not co-lord of 10th, Parashara > > > > has not > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula and Dhanur Lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for Tula lagna. 5th lord Shani is not > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > inspite > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fact that Shani co-lords 4th house. > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Shani > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha(FB).Instead, it is 9th lord Budha > > and > > > > 10th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandra who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are treated as Rajyogkarak. Here Budha is > > 12th > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Hence qualifies as RajYogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at your own Lagna,Dhanur. What > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna? 5th lord Mangal is without blemish > > > > being > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara does not qualify Mangal as > > > > Yogakarak for > > > > > > > > > > Dhanur! It > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mangal as Shubha only and qualifies 9th > > lord > > > > > > Surya and > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha as Yogakarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To repeat, 9th lord when becomes 12th > > lord is > > > > > > > > qualified as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarak > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with respect to Tula lagna but 5th lord > > when > > > > > > becomes > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yogakarak for Dhanur lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Parashara is treating 5th and 9th > > > > diffrently. > > > > > > Is it > > > > > > > > > > not?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But the same applies to 9th lord. > > Saturn is > > > > the > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for Taurus. So why the distinction > > between > > > > 5th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After all you did say "2) only 9th lord > > can > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga" in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is exactly what I wanted to say. > > 5th > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualify as RYK unless it is 10th > > lord. As > > > > a > > > > > > > > matter of > > > > > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies as RYK to Karka lagana > > because > > > > it is > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish). What I am all the while > > saying > > > > is > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord qualifies as RYK if without > > blemish. > > > > > > Among > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > two > > > > > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord. This was my one of the > > earlier > > > > mails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Like being RajYogakaraka is specific > > to > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >only Shubha (FB)can be qualified as > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > > > (Lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >and their Sambandha). Secondly,these > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Blemish can be there(to be qualified > > not > > > > as > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >holding 3,6,8,11 as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To clarify once again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0)5th and 9th lords are always FB i.e. > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1)Only 9th/10th lord is considered as > > RYK > > > > if > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2)Among these two 9th lord is the > > only one > > > > > > who is > > > > > > > > FB. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) Blemish to these two can be > > because of > > > > co- > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have explained for each Lagna how > > this > > > > comes > > > > > > > > out to > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > true. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request you to go through that mail > > and > > > > > > reconsider > > > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know Sanskrit well and I need > > not > > > > tell > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > many a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > times > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > additional words are used to keep > > with > > > > the > > > > > > > > metre of > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > carrying your argument further and > > > > accepting > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > say, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accepting its correctness, I would > > like > > > > to > > > > > > draw > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > attention > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna and allotment of > > rajyogakarakatwa > > > > to > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > happens > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord of 10th and the 5th for that > > > > lagna. Now > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > therefore > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th lord can not be > > rajyogakaraka > > > > since > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as Rajyogakaraka? Is > > saying > > > > that > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakaraka correct in the light > > of > > > > > > > > > > interpretation of > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says, as you see it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was refering to Yogakarak graha > > that > > > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussing FB-FM. Read Tula > > > > > > lagna,Parashara > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > > > > > said > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani and Budha are Shubha (FB) but > > > > only > > > > > > > > Chandra > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogkarak. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "ShanaicharaBudhou Shubhou | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogasya Karakaou > > ChadratatSutaou||" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here it is amply clear that > > although > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > 5th > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > 4th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula lagna but parashara does not > > > > qualify > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogakarka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply qualifies them as Shubha > > (FB). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we go through shlokas of all > > the > > > > Lagnas > > > > > > > > where > > > > > > > > > > > > > > parashara has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > described Shubha(FB),Ashubha (FM) > > and > > > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. It is there in 35th > > adhyaya > > > > > > titled > > > > > > > > > > > > Yogadyaya of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that later in Rajyogadyaa > > > > > > Parashara has > > > > > > > > > > given > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > detail > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that can be Rajyogkarak including > > Trik > > > > > > lords. > > > > > > > > But > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wanted to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > focused with the context in which > > we > > > > had > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > discussions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean that lord of the 5th > > > > can not > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyoga? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka? If I remember my > > BPHS > > > > > > well, > > > > > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not considered FB and yet > > can > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > rajyogakarakas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really sorry for my > > quality > > > > of > > > > > > > > english. I > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > try > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > say that only Shubha(FB) can > > be > > > > RYK. > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > if a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to Rajyoga, it must satisfy > > some > > > > > > > > conditions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) It must be Shubha or > > Functional > > > > > > > > Benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.1) Shubha or FB means lord > > of > > > > 5th > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > 9th. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) only 9th lord can lead to > > > > Rajyoga > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) This 9th lord( which is > > always > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > must > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sambandha with 10th lord. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) This 9th lord should not be > > > > with > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaving > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Rajyogakarak and blemish > > does > > > > not > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > loss of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubhatva. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.1) Blemish to 9th lord can > > be > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > lordship of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3,6,8,11 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.2) Blemish to 9th lord can > > be > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it 'Sambandha' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord that has blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Read together it does mean > > that a > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if > > blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Slight correction. Read > > > > together > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajyogakaraka, if blemished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope this time I made no > > > > mistake in > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > english! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really confused as to > > what > > > > you > > > > > > > > mean by > > > > > > > > > > FB > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > according to you. May be at > > my > > > > age > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > cryptic > > > > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > initials > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > too > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much to grasp. But did you > > not > > > > > > say "I > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualified as > > Rajyogakarak" ? and > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. Read together it > > does > > > > mean > > > > > > > > that a > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > designate as FB) if > > blemished. > > > > But > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehension > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >So why the distinction > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not > > being > > > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no distinction > > from > > > > my > > > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (5th/9th) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is FB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Shubha) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but every FB(Shubha) is > > not > > > > YK. > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to YK. To avoid > > > > repetition > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > indicated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > things by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary connotation > > though > > > > not > > > > > > > > expressed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason,why BPHS has not > > said > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shani for Budha's lagna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like, since before > > describing > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > lagna, > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussed in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general Shubhashubha of > > Bhava- > > > > > > > > Bhavesh. In > > > > > > > > > > > > that it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that "TrikoneshaH ShubhaH > > > > > > SmrutaH". > > > > > > > > > > Keeping > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intreprete shlokas of > > specific > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correct > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu > > and > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have > > nothing > > > > > > much to > > > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari > > which > > > > are > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we > > can > > > > > > dispute > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you ignored this > > > > question > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > should we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari or Guru > > Parahari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > Time and > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you make it clear > > as to > > > > > > what you > > > > > > > > > > meant > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > original > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post, if not functional > > > > > > benefic? So > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Functional benefic not > > being > > > > > > > > yogakaraka > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stage? I do not find any > > > > such > > > > > > > > > > distinction > > > > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shlokas of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you? If I remember > > right, > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra is shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar Ji > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we not take > > > > general and > > > > > > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consideration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being RajYogakaraka is > > > > > > specific to > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB)can be qualified > > as > > > > > > > > Rajyogakarak > > > > > > > > > > (Lord > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sambandha). > > Secondly,these > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > grahas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blemish. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blemish can be there > > (to be > > > > > > > > qualified > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RY) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > holding 3,6,8,11 as > > well. > > > > > > That is > > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (FB) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but being 8th lord as > > well > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not lead to RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I see it as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Guru is > > Shubha > > > > and is > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > qualifies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th lord Shani is > > lord of > > > > > > 11th as > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > give RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if involved with 9th > > lord > > > > > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani RYK as 9th and > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mithuna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shani is Shubha but > > being > > > > 8th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > can not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > even if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > invloved with 10th > > lord > > > > Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Karka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru is Benefic but > > RYK is > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > Mangal. > > > > > > > > > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not RYK status. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Mangal is > > RYK but > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord so > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its association with > > > > Mangal > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RY. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kanya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic > > and > > > > co- > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > of 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Budha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic > > and > > > > co- > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 10th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord Chandra . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrichika > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya-Chandra RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dhanu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Surya Budha RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord Budha is > > benefic > > > > but > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kumbha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shukar only RYK as > > 10th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > Mangal > > > > > > > > > > is 3rd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th lord is benefic > > and > > > > since > > > > > > > > takes > > > > > > > > > > 2nd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lordship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > leads to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RYK > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > along > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with 10th lord Guru. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what I understand > > by > > > > > > Parashara > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Trikonesh(9th and 5th > > > > Lord) > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > alwyas > > > > > > > > > > > > Benefic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lead to Rajyoga if > > owns > > > > > > > > (3,6,8,11). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB > > and 6th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishabha),it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and > > 6th > > > > lord > > > > > > > > (Mangal > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vrishcika),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Lagnesh is NB > > and 8th > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > (Shukra for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tula),it is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sama- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and when it is NM and > > 8th > > > > lord > > > > > > ( > > > > > > > > > > Mangal for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mesha), it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As regards to Laghu > > and > > > > Guru > > > > > > > > > > Parashari and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > undisputed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility I have > > nothing > > > > > > much to > > > > > > > > > > say but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > portions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Guru Parashari > > which > > > > are > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we ignore them as we > > can > > > > > > dispute > > > > > > > > their > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credibility? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for your > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that you > > are > > > > aware > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > always > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in manuscript form > > and > > > > also > > > > > > > > called > > > > > > > > > > > > Ududaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compilation of > > shlokas > > > > from > > > > > > > > various > > > > > > > > > > > > pandits > > > > > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > remembered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > them > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manuscripts that had > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > shloka > > > > > > > > > > > > > > amongst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > safer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to go with What is > > > > > > available in > > > > > > > > > > Laghu > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quoted. The same > > also > > > > > > appears in > > > > > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > editions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does make sense. The > > > > reason > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > following > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > xmRkmaRixnetaraE > > > > > > rNØlaÉaixpaE > > > > > > > > yid, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dharmakarmädhinetärau > > > > > > > > > > randhraläbhädhipau > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yadi | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyae> sMbNxmaÇe [ n > > yaeg< > > > > > > lÉte > > > > > > > > > > nr>.22. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tayoù > > sambandhamätreëa > > > > na > > > > > > yogaà > > > > > > > > > > labhate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > naraù > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||22|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _If lord of the > > 9^th or > > > > > > 10^th > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lords of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > associations do not > > give > > > > > > rise to > > > > > > > > > > (Raj) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yoga._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure that even > > > > > > > > Deveshchandra > > > > > > > > > > Jha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > edition > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here the malfeasance > > > > > > acquired by > > > > > > > > > > lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > due to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simultaneously > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owning the 8th or > > the > > > > 11th > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > > > amply > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First it says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Bhagyavyayadhiptyena > > > > > > > > randresho na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubhaprada" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord of the 8th > > is not > > > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then it goes on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "lagnatrikonapavashat > > > > sa > > > > > > eva > > > > > > > > > > shubhado > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mataH" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if it(8th > > lord) is > > > > > > > > trikonesh > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well,then > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > become > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is in > > Choukhanba > > > > > > Sanskrit > > > > > > > > > > Sansthan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BPHS by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Devashandra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Za. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Atleast > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this edition,we > > > > dont > > > > > > get a > > > > > > > > > > > > condition > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one to read and > > > > follow? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot for > > your > > > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Prabodh, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read what > > Parashara > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > carefully, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > says > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha is > > lagnesha > > > > and is > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > ashubha. > > > > He > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the co-lord of > > the > > > > 9th > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pasting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > approximate > > > > translation > > > > > > (as > > > > > > > > > > much is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lost in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > English > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > translation) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ready > > > > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÉaGyVyaixpTyen > > > > rNØezae n > > > > > > > > zuÉàd>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhägyavyädhipatyena > > > > > > > > randhreço na > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > çubhapradaù | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s @v zuÉsNxata > > > > > > l¶axIzae=ip > > > > > > > > cet! > > > > > > > > > > > > Svym!.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sa eva > > çubhasandhätä > > > > > > > > > > lagnädhéço'pi > > > > > > > > > > > > cet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > svayam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ||9|| > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Lord of the > > 8^th > > > > is not > > > > > > > > > > auspicious, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house. However > > if > > > > he is > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > > > Lord of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lagna > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > occupies > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lagna or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8^th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house he gives > > > > benefic > > > > > > > > results._ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course if > > you are > > > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > shloka, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > let > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which shloka > > you are > > > > > > > > referring > > > > > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh Vekhande > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar ji > > > > > > Namaste > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As per > > Parashara, > > > > 8th > > > > > > > > lord if > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considerd as > > > > Shubha. > > > > > > As > > > > > > > > per > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parashara, 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > house > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ashubha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is 12th to > > 9th the > > > > > > > > bhagya. So > > > > > > > > > > > > when 8th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lord is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > colord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trine > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it, it > > does not > > > > > > affect > > > > > > > > > > badly to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bhgaya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as Shubha. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot > > for > > > > your > > > > > > > > Time and > > > > > > > > > > > > Space. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prabodh > > Vekhande > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jai Jai > > Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Har Har > > Shankar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vedic Astrologyandhealing > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing%40> > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <Vedic Astrologyandhealing% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <sharma.chandrashekhar@> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lalit, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are > > yet not > > > > > > > > treated as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > benefics, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dasha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > analysis. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results are > > > > mixed > > > > > > as you > > > > > > > > > > rightly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deduce. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > generally > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > graha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > owns a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good house > > and > > > > > > another > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > 6th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8th it > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional > > > > benefic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > litsol > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear > > > > Group/Elders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pls. > > > > > > correct/enhance > > > > > > > > > > > > following , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > required - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a) If one > > and > > > > same > > > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1st > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aries Asc > > and > > > > > > Venus > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > Libra > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc, is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) If one > > and > > > > same > > > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *and* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Leo Asc > > and > > > > Merc > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > Aquar > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > placed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > considered > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > c) If on > > and > > > > same > > > > > > > > planet > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > lord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 8'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 9'th > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eg - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sat for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gemini > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asc and > > > > placed in > > > > > > > > 9'th is > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My View : > > > > Though > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > bad, > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fully > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mixed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results we > > > > should > > > > > > > > derive. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be > > > > posting > > > > > > > > > > exceptions > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > houeses > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lalit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.