Varga Usage

[Guest guest]

Om Krsnaaya Namah

 

Hey Chris!

 

Nice to hear from you. How are things going? Anyway, to astrology...

 

Both Robert and I agreed a week ago that Prabhupada probably would not allow

agreement on his chart, so I think it's time to drop this topic, but your

mail raises an interesting and important question:

 

> Usually, the answer is found in the varga charts and the navamsha chart

> specifically. But the real question that arises from this realization is:

> does this special emphasis on the navamsha chart only apply in the case of

> twins? Is it because they have a special 'twin karma' that compels us to

> look at the navamsha chart primarily? Or is this the lesson that

> twins are

> teaching us, that we should pay more attention to the navamsha

> than most of

> us usually do? I don't know the question to that question, but I suspect

 

You don't know the question to that question?! How strange of you? Just

kidding :-)

 

Anyway, the current popular opinion with regards to Varga charts seems to be

that everything MUST be seen in the Rasi chart, and the Vargas are

secondary - i.e. if the rasi does not agree or give indications, then the

varga is wrong. Call me dumb (no not really, at least not in public,

pleeeeaaase - I'm a double Leo!), but I strongly disagree with that view,

although I probably work in such framework without knowing it most of the

time.

 

My thoughts are as follows: If life is complex, and Jyotish aims to model

life accurately, then surely jyotish is going to be lot more complex than

one chart, with 12 signs, 12 houses and 9 planets indicating absolutely

everything, in a fully predictable manner. Don't get me wrong... the rasi

chart is excellent, and is a very basis for a chart interpretation, but my

experience is that if a varga is accurate, it will reflect the matters

related to it's significations a lot more clearly and often more accurately

than the Rasi. The main exception is the Navamsa, which seems to act like a

secondary rasi, while simultaneously showing marriage etc. excellently. The

strength or weakness of the Navamsa modifies pretty much everything, IMHO.

Take for example Bill Clinton's chart (I use Virgo rising, as I know you do

as well). You don't exactly see many raja yogas in the chart, do you? Yes,

there is one in the eleventh, but it's hardly suggestive of somebody who was

the President of the most powerful nation in the world. Yet look at the

Navamsa, and you see the fifth Lord and ascendant Lord, both conjunct in the

Lagna, both Kshatriya planets (administrative/warrior caste) and they are in

exaltation and mulatrikona respctively. And to top it all off, they are

aspected fully by ninth Lord and natural benefic Jupiter. This is one

navamsa that appears to have modified the rasi.

 

GWB's chart. His is stronger, and has more Raja Yogas especially when viewed

from the Chandra and Surya Lagnas. But look at his Navamsa, and he has Rahu

in the tenth, in regal Leo, associated with all three trinal Lords, while

the tenth Lord (Sun) is exalted. This seems to have had an influence, I

would say.

 

Or take the first blind chart that you posted to the list, where I think

Marriage occured in a Mercury antardasa, and yet Mercury was unrelated to

the seventh, or seventh Lord or Venus. Yet in the Navamsa, it was the

seventh Lord in his own seventh, with Venus and Ketu.

 

Finally take Christopher Reeve's Chart:

 

25/09/1952

03:06:00

Manhattan, NY, USA

 

Lagna = 24*43' Cancer

 

All his kids were born in his Venus Dasa. Now this is indicated in the rasi

depending on what factors you consider. Venus is aspected by Jupiter, and is

in a naksatra of Mars, who is fifth Lord in the fifth. But to me, the

Saptamsa Venus, who is in it's mulatrikona in the fifth with Jupiter is a

much easier explaination to handle and to predict from.

 

So anyway, that's what I think about Vargas and I feel they are at least as

important as the rasi, if not more when it comes to it's own significations.

 

Your turn.

 

Pursottam

 

P.S. I don't buy the "twin karma" thing either. If that were the case, that

means that vargas are almost useless for everybody else, and one wonders why

the Sages didn't explain a special "Twin Horoscopy", like you have "Female

Horoscopy".

 

 

_______

 

Get your free @ address at

[Guest guest]

I always think in terms of how the planets actually function, not in

astrology, but in physics. The science of Light, or waves, implies a

connection to waves, or gravity.

 

Look through a kaleidascope- I have one which has 2 wheels of glass in

front of the lens made of 6 sections each totally thus 12 pieces of

glass which combine, which is not repres. of Jyotish, but somewhat like it.

 

Picture the planets emitting different colors and how those mix into

kaleidoscopic rainbos going in different directions.

 

Vargas are finer divisions of the light interactions. Rasi is basic,

vargas are numeric number games, which light and all waves love to

harmonically produce- as in music, if you examine the waves, there are

subwaves, called overtones- these types of sub harmonic overtones are a

normal part of all wave theories, and a normal part of art, where a

little more yello mixed with blue makes the green result change a tad-

what you're actually seeing is wave changes hitting your eye sensors.

 

Everything is waves, EVERYTHING. Matter is waves. Take ice verse water

verse steam, it's all about changing physical factors and the apparition

changes to us.

 

So vargas are simple number divisions which the seers (actually God

originally) chose to reveal to us as the important ones.

 

These sub waves affect key physical realities in atoms, therefore

molecules, therefore cells, therefore beings. The body forms during a

period, and is a representation of the place and time of birth, just as

a flower springs forth and opens on a certain day at a certain time all

according to the environment. You can fool them in greenhouses. This is

proof. We just have to wake up and see the light, I mean feel the vibes,

I mean, smell the combinations of factors in the Folgers.

 

So, vargas are the subtler spectrums of the Rasi. They are very

important.

 

Because relationships, Sambandha, is the essence of life, the highest

thing in life, the entrance to spiritual life, and the ultimate activity

of God, ie, Madhurya Lila, intimite pastimes, so the Navamsa, 9 part, as

so also the 9th house, is the seat of the highest fortune for us, and

therefore relates to our ability to relate. Can you relate to all of this?

 

The finer vargas then become more interesting, and others based on their

numbers as relating to formational realities in life.

 

Numbers are everything, and 3 is the first amazing number, as it relates

to creation, femininity, circles, and unending change. Don't ask me to

explain this or my madness will be too revealed.

 

Ahh, the music of the spheres!

--

 

 

Das Goravani

 

 

 

 

 

 

2852 Willamette St # 353

Eugene OR USA 97405

 

or

Fax: 541-343-0344

 

"Goravani Jyotish"

Vedic/Hindu Astrology Software

[Guest guest]

Pursottam:

 

>

>> Usually, the answer is found in the varga charts and the navamsha chart

>> specifically. But the real question that arises from this realization is:

>> does this special emphasis on the navamsha chart only apply in the case of

>> twins? Is it because they have a special 'twin karma' that compels us to

>> look at the navamsha chart primarily? Or is this the lesson that

>> twins are

>> teaching us, that we should pay more attention to the navamsha

>> than most of

>> us usually do? I don't know the question to that question, but I suspect

>

>You don't know the question to that question?! How strange of you? Just

>kidding :-)

 

AH, yes, the precious insights that are revealed in mistakes. I like that

formulation. Sort of a zen koan. A syllogism for the insane.

 

>

>Anyway, the current popular opinion with regards to Varga charts seems to be

>that everything MUST be seen in the Rasi chart, and the Vargas are

>secondary - i.e. if the rasi does not agree or give indications, then the

>varga is wrong. Call me dumb (no not really, at least not in public,

>pleeeeaaase - I'm a double Leo!), but I strongly disagree with that view,

>although I probably work in such framework without knowing it most of the

>time.

 

I think you're right. But the question is when to pay more attention to

the navamsha and when to focus on the rashi?

 

 

>

>My thoughts are as follows: If life is complex, and Jyotish aims to model

>life accurately, then surely jyotish is going to be lot more complex than

>one chart, with 12 signs, 12 houses and 9 planets indicating absolutely

>everything, in a fully predictable manner. Don't get me wrong... the rasi

>chart is excellent, and is a very basis for a chart interpretation, but my

>experience is that if a varga is accurate, it will reflect the matters

>related to it's significations a lot more clearly and often more accurately

>than the Rasi. The main exception is the Navamsa, which seems to act like a

>secondary rasi, while simultaneously showing marriage etc. excellently.

 

But then there's the whole question of how to read it for marriage: is the

first house the native and the 7th the partner? And is the marriage as a

whole seen by the first house and lord? Or should you pay attention to the

rashi 7L in the navamsha for the partner and the marriage? I have fiddled

with these questions for a while and haven't come to any firm conclusions.

I just sort of throw all in the pot and simmer and stir.

 

The

>strength or weakness of the Navamsa modifies pretty much everything, IMHO.

>Take for example Bill Clinton's chart (I use Virgo rising, as I know you do

>as well). You don't exactly see many raja yogas in the chart, do you? Yes,

>there is one in the eleventh, but it's hardly suggestive of somebody who was

>the President of the most powerful nation in the world. Yet look at the

>Navamsa, and you see the fifth Lord and ascendant Lord, both conjunct in the

>Lagna, both Kshatriya planets (administrative/warrior caste) and they are in

>exaltation and mulatrikona respctively. And to top it all off, they are

>aspected fully by ninth Lord and natural benefic Jupiter. This is one

>navamsa that appears to have modified the rasi.

 

Right. It's all there. But then, what about the dashamsha chart? Do you

read that like a rashi chart, with aspects, yogas and all? There isn't

much there from a house perspective but what I do consider important is

that Rahu is only one dashamsha degrees from the Asc(I use 8.49 and not for

that reason, BTW), arguably the most sensitive point in the varga chart.

On the read-the-varga-like-rashi side, Jupiter trines Saturn in the 10th

with less than one degree orb. That's good for sure, but there ain't a lot

else.

 

>

>GWB's chart. His is stronger, and has more Raja Yogas especially when viewed

>from the Chandra and Surya Lagnas. But look at his Navamsa, and he has Rahu

>in the tenth, in regal Leo, associated with all three trinal Lords, while

>the tenth Lord (Sun) is exalted. This seems to have had an influence, I

>would say.

 

Most definitely, Holmes.

 

>

>Or take the first blind chart that you posted to the list, where I think

>Marriage occured in a Mercury antardasa, and yet Mercury was unrelated to

>the seventh, or seventh Lord or Venus. Yet in the Navamsa, it was the

>seventh Lord in his own seventh, with Venus and Ketu.

>

>Finally take Christopher Reeve's Chart:

>

>25/09/1952

>03:06:00

>Manhattan, NY, USA

>

>Lagna = 24*43' Cancer

>

>All his kids were born in his Venus Dasa. Now this is indicated in the rasi

>depending on what factors you consider. Venus is aspected by Jupiter, and is

>in a naksatra of Mars, who is fifth Lord in the fifth. But to me, the

>Saptamsa Venus, who is in it's mulatrikona in the fifth with Jupiter is a

>much easier explaination to handle and to predict from.

>

>So anyway, that's what I think about Vargas and I feel they are at least as

>important as the rasi, if not more when it comes to it's own significations.

>

>Your turn.

 

I'm away from home and my books at the moment so I'll have to take a rain

check on any substantive analysis. Maybe in a couple of days I'll post

something.

 

Chris

 

>

>Pursottam

>

>P.S. I don't buy the "twin karma" thing either. If that were the case, that

>means that vargas are almost useless for everybody else, and one wonders why

>the Sages didn't explain a special "Twin Horoscopy", like you have "Female

>Horoscopy".

>

>

>_______

>

>Get your free @ address at

>

>

>

>

>Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya; Hare Krishna; Om Tat Sat

>: gjlist-

>

>

>

>Your use of is subject to

>

>

>

>