Guest guest Posted March 10, 2001 Report Share Posted March 10, 2001 Dear Venkatesh and Wendy, At 05:29 PM 3/10/01 +0800, you wrote: >There are different methods for calculating Gulika and (as far as I'm >concerned) the jury's still out on which one is correct. I actually used >Parashara's Light to calculate your chart as I'd forgot how to calculate the >upagrahas with GJ (sorry Das). With PL I get Gulika 04.16 Libra. I would >appreciate some input from other astrologers regarding the calculation of >Gulika. It would seem though that both PL and GJ (two top programs) have >Gulika in Libra. Most of the confusion has, as you say, to do with the calculations of Gulika. For Gulika, first find the time from local sunrise to sunset. Then, divide that time by 8. Then, note the ruler of the day (viz. Moon for Monday, Mars, for Tuesday, etc.). The ruler of the day rules the first part, the next day ruler the second part, etc. The 8th part has no ruler. Now, the part ruled by Saturn is called Gulika; the part ruled by Jupiter is Yamakantaka, the one ruled by Mars is Mrityu, the one ruled by the Sun is called Kaala, and the one ruled by Mercury is called Ardhaprahara. To find the degree of Gulika, find the exact time of the *ending point* of Saturn's portion. If you cast an ascendant for this time (date and place are the same as for the birth), then you get the exact degree and sign of Gulika. (Note that there is an exception for nighttime births: Begin the counting from the 5th planet in order, from the ruler of the day). CONTROVERSY: This is where the confusions lies: Some scholars say that the time of the exact *beginning* of Saturn's division, as above, should be taken to calculate the degree of the zodiac rising (ascendant) for Gulika (instead of the *ending* point). Most scholars, however, say that the end point of Saturn's portion should be taken. So some computer programs may calculate it one way, and others the other way. (Actually, Parasara advises calculating from the end portion). If you're really invested in finding out which one is correct, you might try doing some research with Gulika, using both calculation methods, and see which you find to be more correct. I personally believe that calculating from the latter part of Saturn's portion, is more correct. I had a client whose lagna lord Mars was in the 8th house, mildly afflicted, yet exactly conjoined Gulika. Muscular strength thus suffered, and she has been in a wheel chair most of her life with Muscular dystrophy. Other abundant examples can be found, such as of persons with extreme psychoses having Gulika and Saturn (both) fully aspecting or conjoining the Moon, as well as the Arudha of the 5th house. A grouping of other Upagrahas joining the fray, make all this much worse. OTHER CONTROVERSIES: Some scholars say that Mandi is the same as Gulika, when in actuality, there are separate equations for calculation of Mandi. So perhaps, inadvertently, some computer programers may give calculations for Mandi, but call it Gulika. Or, they may give the calculations as above for Gulika, and call it Mandi, etc. So there are a number of possible ways to bungle the calculations. Anyway, in my humble opinion, if you divide the day by 8 as above, and calculate Gulika for the *ending* point of Saturn's part, then you will be more satisfied with the Gulika that you get! Best wishes, Robert ===================================== Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer 760 NW Broken Arrow Rd. Bend, OR. 97701-9037 Phone: 541-318-0248 visit <http://www.robertkoch.com> or e-mail rk. rk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2001 Report Share Posted March 10, 2001 Robert, Thanks for this note as it clears things up for me too. Phyl - Robert A. Koch <rkoch <gjlist> Saturday, March 10, 2001 11:43 AM [gjlist] Will the real Gulika please stand up! > Dear Venkatesh and Wendy, > > At 05:29 PM 3/10/01 +0800, you wrote: > > >There are different methods for calculating Gulika and (as far as I'm > >concerned) the jury's still out on which one is correct. I actually used > >Parashara's Light to calculate your chart as I'd forgot how to calculate the > >upagrahas with GJ (sorry Das). With PL I get Gulika 04.16 Libra. I would > >appreciate some input from other astrologers regarding the calculation of > >Gulika. It would seem though that both PL and GJ (two top programs) have > >Gulika in Libra. > > Most of the confusion has, as you say, to do with the calculations of > Gulika. For Gulika, first find the time from local sunrise to > sunset. Then, divide that time by 8. Then, note the ruler of the day > (viz. Moon for Monday, Mars, for Tuesday, etc.). The ruler of the day rules > the first part, the next day ruler the second part, etc. The 8th part has > no ruler. Now, the part ruled by Saturn is called Gulika; the part ruled > by Jupiter is Yamakantaka, the one ruled by Mars is Mrityu, the one ruled > by the Sun is called Kaala, and the one ruled by Mercury is called > Ardhaprahara. To find the degree of Gulika, find the exact time of the > *ending point* of Saturn's portion. If you cast an ascendant for this time > (date and place are the same as for the birth), then you get the exact > degree and sign of Gulika. > > (Note that there is an exception for nighttime births: Begin the counting > from the 5th planet in order, from the ruler of the day). > > CONTROVERSY: > > This is where the confusions lies: Some scholars say that the time of the > exact *beginning* of Saturn's division, as above, should be taken to > calculate the degree of the zodiac rising (ascendant) for Gulika (instead > of the *ending* point). Most scholars, however, say that the end point of > Saturn's portion should be taken. So some computer programs may calculate > it one way, and others the other way. (Actually, Parasara advises > calculating from the end portion). If you're really invested in finding > out which one is correct, you might try doing some research with Gulika, > using both calculation methods, and see which you find to be more correct. > > I personally believe that calculating from the latter part of Saturn's > portion, is more correct. I had a client whose lagna lord Mars was in the > 8th house, mildly afflicted, yet exactly conjoined Gulika. Muscular > strength thus suffered, and she has been in a wheel chair most of her life > with Muscular dystrophy. Other abundant examples can be found, such as of > persons with extreme psychoses having Gulika and Saturn (both) fully > aspecting or conjoining the Moon, as well as the Arudha of the 5th > house. A grouping of other Upagrahas joining the fray, make all this much > worse. > > OTHER CONTROVERSIES: > > Some scholars say that Mandi is the same as Gulika, when in actuality, > there are separate equations for calculation of Mandi. So perhaps, > inadvertently, some computer programers may give calculations for Mandi, > but call it Gulika. Or, they may give the calculations as above for > Gulika, and call it Mandi, etc. So there are a number of possible ways to > bungle the calculations. Anyway, in my humble opinion, if you divide the > day by 8 as above, and calculate Gulika for the *ending* point of Saturn's > part, then you will be more satisfied with the Gulika that you get! > > Best wishes, > Robert > > ===================================== > Robert A. Koch, Vedic Astrologer > 760 NW Broken Arrow Rd. > Bend, OR. 97701-9037 > Phone: 541-318-0248 > visit <http://www.robertkoch.com> or e-mail > rk. rk > > > > gjlist- > > > > Your use of is subject to > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 11, 2001 Report Share Posted March 11, 2001 Robert Wrote ============ CONTROVERSY: This is where the confusions lies: Some scholars say that the time of the exact *beginning* of Saturn's division, as above, should be taken to calculate the degree of the zodiac rising (ascendant) for Gulika (instead of the *ending* point). Most scholars, however, say that the end point of Saturn's portion should be taken. So some computer programs may calculate it one way, and others the other way. (Actually, Parasara advises calculating from the end portion). If you're really invested in finding out which one is correct, you might try doing some research with Gulika, using both calculation methods, and see which you find to be more correct. I personally believe that calculating from the latter part of Saturn's portion, is more correct. My Reply ========= I've held off on a firm decision regarding the correct method for calculating Gulika as, quite frankly, I would much rather him NOT BE where he is in my chart. However, I'm afraid, I must (reluctantly) endorse the latter part of Saturn's portion as the correct approach. I am painfully aware of the "muddy waters" Gulika forces me to swim through, but (perhaps because of Mercury's strength in 9th) I have no morbid fears of "insanity". To my mind it simply means that I have to strive that much harder...to "get there" in spite of...so to speak. When Malcolm Fraser (ex-prime minister) made the statement: "Life was not meant to be easy" I'm sure he had me in mind :-) For some there is no real "resting place" even in "good" dasas...always something to overcome! I can understand Venkatesh's alarm at the possible conjunction of ME/GUL in the 8th. But for me, rather than being fearful, I'm eternally grateful for my knowledge of jyotish that alerts me to the cause of the difficulties I often face. I'm more able to stand back and VIEW my karma rather than be absorbed (overwhelmed) by it...perhaps without the blessing of this divine knowledge (9th house), succumbing to Gulika would have been inevitable. This is the great glory of jyotish...it gives us understanding! We only fear what we don't know, what we don't understand or recognise. (perhaps with this combination in 8th understanding would not be possible...ahhh! the subtleties of jyotish) In the book of Job (Bible) we're told that to get "knowledge" is the greatest getting, the greatest wealth; we're also told that "in all your getting (of knowledge) get understanding". Regards Wendy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 11, 2001 Report Share Posted March 11, 2001 Wendy, I thought you might enjoy this definition of patience given by Everett Irion,a metaphysical philosopher.Patience is the measure of our understanding of our responsibility for what we experience,what we have created.It measures our understanding of our responsibility for a manifested idea that we "experience" in time and space.When we are impatient, we exclaim,I just do not understand! And we do not.But those with great spiritual understanding of the purpose of their expeience exhibit great patience.Edgar Cayce said that this world consists of three dimensions of consciousness:time,space and patience.In patience we become more aware of the continuity of life,of our soul being a portion of the divine wholeness.Irion suggested we define time as the measure of our understanding of a manifested idea; space as the measure of our understanding of the relationship between manifested ideas;patience as the measure of our understanding of the purpose of manifested ideas.Is it possible that we are caught in the idea of an experience until we understand and accept it's purpose?Only then to move onto another idea/experience?Do we repeat our experience until we understand it well enough ,so that we can conceive adequately our next experience.What dimension does an idea exist in,the fourth of course.What is the the fifth?Hope you find these ideas of interest. Patiently, Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 11, 2001 Report Share Posted March 11, 2001 - Wendy Vasicek <wenvas <gjlist> Sunday, March 11, 2001 12:36 AM RE: [gjlist] Will the real Gulika please stand up! > Robert Wrote > ============ > > CONTROVERSY: > > This is where the confusions lies: Some scholars say that the time of the > exact *beginning* of Saturn's division, as above, should be taken to > calculate the degree of the zodiac rising (ascendant) for Gulika (instead > of the *ending* point). Most scholars, however, say that the end point of > Saturn's portion should be taken. So some computer programs may calculate > it one way, and others the other way. (Actually, Parasara advises > calculating from the end portion). If you're really invested in finding > out which one is correct, you might try doing some research with Gulika, > using both calculation methods, and see which you find to be more correct. > > I personally believe that calculating from the latter part of Saturn's > portion, is more correct. > > My Reply > ========= > I've held off on a firm decision regarding the correct method for > calculating Gulika as, quite frankly, I would much rather him NOT BE where > he is in my chart. However, I'm afraid, I must (reluctantly) endorse the > latter part of Saturn's portion as the correct approach. > > I am painfully aware of the "muddy waters" Gulika forces me to swim through, > but (perhaps because of Mercury's strength in 9th) I have no morbid fears of > "insanity". To my mind it simply means that I have to strive that much > harder...to "get there" in spite of...so to speak. > > When Malcolm Fraser (ex-prime minister) made the statement: "Life was not > meant to be easy" I'm sure he had me in mind :-) > > For some there is no real "resting place" even in "good" dasas...always > something to overcome! > > I can understand Venkatesh's alarm at the possible conjunction of ME/GUL in > the 8th. But for me, rather than being fearful, I'm eternally grateful for > my knowledge of jyotish that alerts me to the cause of the difficulties I > often face. I'm more able to stand back and VIEW my karma rather than be > absorbed (overwhelmed) by it...perhaps without the blessing of this divine > knowledge (9th house), succumbing to Gulika would have been inevitable. > > This is the great glory of jyotish...it gives us understanding! We only fear > what we don't know, what we don't understand or recognise. > (perhaps with this combination in 8th understanding would not be > possible...ahhh! the subtleties of jyotish) > > In the book of Job (Bible) we're told that to get "knowledge" is the > greatest getting, the greatest wealth; we're also told that "in all your > getting (of knowledge) get understanding". > > Regards > Wendy > > > > > > gjlist- > > > > Your use of is subject to > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 11, 2001 Report Share Posted March 11, 2001 Dear Dave, How very wise and relevant. I had just been contemplating the significance of Saturn (patience) in relation to MER/GUL conjunction...then up popped your post to reflect my thoughts. I was thinking on the fact that (for me) Asc lord Saturn is the father of Gulika...and is it not so that the father has authority over the Son? In which case would it not be reasonable to surmise that Asc lord Saturn's dispositor Mercury would have authority over Gulika (by proxy)? Certainly (I believe) Saturn brings wisdom through pain, understanding through patience..... Yes! In all your getting, get understanding. Thanks for your post Dave, Wendy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2001 Report Share Posted March 12, 2001 Dear Friends, When you divide Dinman (duration of the day) and Ratriman (Duration of night) into eight parts, the eighth part is called "Niresh" (One without a Lord. So if you calculate on the ending part of each part, then, in fact no part remains without a lord and the theory of "Niresh" goes for a six. Manoj _______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2001 Report Share Posted March 12, 2001 Manoj Pathak wrote: > Dear Friends, > > When you divide Dinman (duration of the day) and Ratriman (Duration of > night) into eight parts, the eighth part is called "Niresh" (One without a > Lord. Dear Manoj, >So if you calculate on the ending part of each part, then, in fact no > part remains without a lord and the theory of "Niresh" goes for a six. > Please explain and elaborate what you mean. Are you supporting or challenging the GJ way of calculating Gulika? regards Mani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2001 Report Share Posted March 12, 2001 Dear Mani, I take the beginning time to calculate Gulik or Mandi. For me, it is one, no controversy for me. Manoj >subra >gjlist >gjlist >Re: [gjlist] Will the real Gulika please stand up! >Mon, 12 Mar 2001 16:45:48 +0100 > >Manoj Pathak wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > > > When you divide Dinman (duration of the day) and Ratriman (Duration of > > night) into eight parts, the eighth part is called "Niresh" (One without >a > > Lord. > >Dear Manoj, > > >So if you calculate on the ending part of each part, then, in fact no > > part remains without a lord and the theory of "Niresh" goes for a six. > > > >Please explain and elaborate what you mean. Are you supporting or >challenging >the GJ way of calculating Gulika? > >regards >Mani > > > >gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > _______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. 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.