Guest guest Posted June 1, 1999 Report Share Posted June 1, 1999 Namaste Sanjay and Narasimha, Om namo Narayanaya I have a few questions related to the use of Narayana dasa that you have taught and suggested. I will be grateful for your answers to these questions, as you two are the only authorities on this dasa at this point in time. Now, there are a couple of inconsistencies in "The Crux of Astrology" that I am hoping you will kindly answer for me, as they are key to the correct calculation of the dasas: 1.) As per the following from a previous correspondence: > * Dasas periods containing KETU, should be reversed. That is, the order > of dasas beginning form the sign having Ketu, should be reversed; and the > dasa's years, counted from the sign having Ketu, will also be reversed. > *Correct*, or *Incorrect*? >SRATH: Yes, this is based on the "Vipareetam" dictum for Ketu. On Page 74-75 of COA, you give the example chart of Amitabh Bachchan. In that chart, Ketu occupies the lagna, and lagna is stronger than the 7th house, so the Narayana dasas begin from the lagna (Aquarius). Now, according to the above dictum, the counting of the dasas should be done in *forward* zodiacal direction to Saturn (the stronger between Saturn and Rahu). Yet, in your listing of the dasa years on page 75, Aquarius' dasa is shown as 9 years, which shows that you counted in the reverse direction instead. **My question therefore: Are there exceptions to the above rule that students should know with regard to certain horoscopic instances? Or, was it a mistake in editing? 2.) With regard to the following in our previous correspondence: > * Dasas periods containing SATURN, will always be forward, zodiacally. > That is, the order of dasas beginning from the sign having Saturn, will > always be forward, even if they are even signs. Determination of years > for such dasas having Saturn, will also be counted in forward, zodiacal > direction. *Correct*, or *Incorrect*? >SRATH: Yes, based on the dictum "SANAUCHE TYEKE" On page 61 of the COA, you gave the example chart of Jawahar Lal Nehru. In that chart, Saturn occupies Varnada sign of Leo, which is ordinarily an even-footed sign in which the counting for the dasa years would go in reverse. Yet, according to the above dictum, the counting should go forward, and the length of the dasa should be 3 years. Instead, you gave (on page 63) 10 years as the length of the Leo dasa. Also, one year was added, even though the Sun is not exalted in Scorpio where he is placed. **Again, can you please explain the exceptions, if any apply in these instances. 3.) Similarly, in the chart of N.T. Ramarao, on page 97 of COA, Shani occupies the sign of Virgo, which is ordinarily an even-footed sign, yet we are instructed that the counting of the dasa years should go forward zodiacally since Saturn occupies that sign. You gave 4 years as the maximum length of the dasa (because there is a balance of the opening dasa needed to be calculated for the Sudasa being shown). If the full length of the dasa were 4 years, then that means you counted in reverse to Virgo instead. * Also, the dasa of Aquarius is given (with Rahu in Leo, and Saturn in Virgo) as 6 years, which means that you gave the counting of dasa years to Rahu, instead of Saturn, who is stronger in Virgo than Rahu in Leo, and with higher degrees in his sign as well. **My final question on all of these is again: are there exceptions to the rules of calculating Narayana dasa and Sudasa, or were there simply editing errors in the book? Thank you, respectfully, 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 ------ eGroups.com home: sjvc - Simplifying group communications Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 1999 Report Share Posted June 1, 1999 Om namo Narayanaya Dear Robert, >Namaste Sanjay and Narasimha, > >Om namo Narayanaya > >I have a few questions related to the use of Narayana dasa that you have >taught and suggested. I will be grateful for your answers to these >questions, as you two are the only authorities on this dasa at this point >in time. Thank you for your kindness, but I am not an authority. Definitely not on Narayana dasa. >Now, there are a couple of inconsistencies in "The Crux of Astrology" that >I am hoping you will kindly answer for me, as they are key to the correct >calculation of the dasas: Almost all the inconsistencies have to do with a misunderstanding you have. If Saturn or Ketu occupy the sign that starts dasas (lagna or the 7th from it, whichever is stronger), then we have these two exceptions. If it is Saturn, progression of dasas will be regular and zodiacal and if it Ketu, then we have to reverse the direction of dasa progression. This exception, however, does NOT apply to counting dasa years. You misunderstood it. If Taurus starts dasas and Venus is in Gemini, dasa sequence normally is Ta, Sg, Cn, Aq etc (i.e. backward progression of six) and Ta dasa is for 1 year. If Ketu occupies Taurus in such a scenario, dasa sequence becomes Ta, Li, Pi, Le etc (direction of progression is "reversed" from backward to forward) and Ta dasa is still for 1 year (i.e. you don't count in reverse and say 11). If Saturn occupies Taurus instead of Ketu, dasa sequence becomes Ta, Ge, Cn, Le etc (regular/forward and zodiacal) and Ta dasa will again be for 1 year. >1.) As per the following from a previous correspondence: >> * Dasas periods containing KETU, should be reversed. That is, the order >> of dasas beginning form the sign having Ketu, should be reversed; and the >> dasa's years, counted from the sign having Ketu, will also be reversed. >> *Correct*, or *Incorrect*? > >>SRATH: Yes, this is based on the "Vipareetam" dictum for Ketu. > >On Page 74-75 of COA, you give the example chart of Amitabh Bachchan. In >that chart, Ketu occupies the lagna, and lagna is stronger than the 7th >house, so the Narayana dasas begin from the lagna (Aquarius). Now, >according to the above dictum, the counting of the dasas should be done in >*forward* zodiacal direction to Saturn (the stronger between Saturn and >Rahu). Yet, in your listing of the dasa years on page 75, Aquarius' dasa >is shown as 9 years, which shows that you counted in the reverse direction >instead. > >**My question therefore: Are there exceptions to the above rule that >students should know with regard to certain horoscopic instances? Or, was >it a mistake in editing? > >2.) With regard to the following in our previous correspondence: > >> * Dasas periods containing SATURN, will always be forward, zodiacally. >> That is, the order of dasas beginning from the sign having Saturn, will >> always be forward, even if they are even signs. Determination of years >> for such dasas having Saturn, will also be counted in forward, zodiacal >> direction. *Correct*, or *Incorrect*? > >>SRATH: Yes, based on the dictum "SANAUCHE TYEKE" > >On page 61 of the COA, you gave the example chart of Jawahar Lal Nehru. In >that chart, Saturn occupies Varnada sign of Leo, which is ordinarily an >even-footed sign in which the counting for the dasa years would go in >reverse. Yet, according to the above dictum, the counting should go >forward, and the length of the dasa should be 3 years. Instead, you gave >(on page 63) 10 years as the length of the Leo dasa. Also, one year was >added, even though the Sun is not exalted in Scorpio where he is placed. I will wait for Sanjay's clarification. >**Again, can you please explain the exceptions, if any apply in these >instances. > >3.) Similarly, in the chart of N.T. Ramarao, on page 97 of COA, Shani >occupies the sign of Virgo, which is ordinarily an even-footed sign, yet we >are instructed that the counting of the dasa years should go forward >zodiacally since Saturn occupies that sign. You gave 4 years as the >maximum length of the dasa (because there is a balance of the opening dasa >needed to be calculated for the Sudasa being shown). If the full length of >the dasa were 4 years, then that means you counted in reverse to Virgo >instead. > >* Also, the dasa of Aquarius is given (with Rahu in Leo, and Saturn in >Virgo) as 6 years, which means that you gave the counting of dasa years to >Rahu, instead of Saturn, who is stronger in Virgo than Rahu in Leo, and >with higher degrees in his sign as well. I don't have the birthdata on my work PC. I will check it at home. Please bear in mind that I haven't yet given you all the rules of strength that Sanjay uses. If the tie is not broken even after applying all other rules (which do not inlcude degree comparison), we should take the lord who gives higher number of dasa years. This is what Parasara said in BPHS in the section on Chara dasa. >**My final question on all of these is again: are there exceptions to the >rules of calculating Narayana dasa and Sudasa, or were there simply editing >errors in the book? > >Thank you, respectfully, >Robert May Jupiter's light shine on us, Narasimha ------ eGroups.com home: sjvc - Simplifying group communications 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.